TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Ok. I have to add this. This is my third time sending this e-mail. The first
time, I forgot to remove the footer, and my post bounced. That's okay. So, I
removed the footer and resent. That second attempt bounced because the
"first line" of my post matched the "first line of a recent post," which is
a nice filter to stop duplicate posts, but since my first post bounced . .
.. I suppose I ought to be more careful about the footer thing, eh? Ah well,
you get to read this because I am stubborn-enough to insist my rather
vanilla response makes the list. ;?)
Personally, I agree.
However, I have fought and lost that same battle here, before. I have even
used, as ammo, older versions of the UG that promised future functionality
that was *never* actually implemented.
All I could do was to present my reasons for not wanting to include such
references in post-sales documents, and my point of view was considered
before I was overruled by folks up the food chain (which is fine, the docs
are company docs, they are *not* mine, personally, so I was and am happy to
have had my say, even if I was overruled).
I am currently updating a user's manual from a year and a half ago
written
by a different author. There are several references in the manual
of future
funcionality for the particular application I am updating the manual
for.
For example, "The XXX allows you to do YYY. In a future release,
you will
be able to do ZZZ." Personally, I think this is a bad practice and
don't
feel that any future plans for the application should be in a user's
(basically a "How to") manual. I mean, this manual is a year and a
half
old, as I mentioned, and the future functionality is still future
functionality.
Wouldn't that be best left to the marketing literature?
________________________________________________
Sean Brierley
Lead Technical Writer
Jenzabar, Inc.
One Union Place
Hartford, CT 06103
www.jenzabar.com
tel: 860-728-6777 x211
fax: 860-247-0249
sean -at- quodata -dot- com
*** Deva(tm) Tools for Dreamweaver and Deva(tm) Search ***
Build Contents, Indexes, and Search for Web Sites and Help Systems
Available now at http://www.devahelp.com or info -at- devahelp -dot- com
TECH*COMM 2001 Conference, July 15-18 in Washington, DC
The Help Technology Conference, August 21-24 in Boston, MA
Details and online registration at http://www.SolutionsEvents.com
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
