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.
Be prepared to be stunned. The BOM does not contain a part number for the doc. Maybe I should insist on this from now on.
I like your part number/rev number combo. Where do you put this?
best,
Paul
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Joe Malin" <jmalin -at- tuvox -dot- com>
> Hi!
>
> What I do is assign a product/part number to the document, and also a
> revision number.
>
> for example DD12345-01 is the initial release and DD12345-02 is the next
> revision *of the document*.
>
> The part number for a document does *not* have to match the part number
> for the product it documents.
>
> *Most importantly*, the *revision numbers* do not have to match. A
> customer determines the document for a particular product from
> information in the document itself. Your company matches the document to
> a product revision through the product's bill of materials (BOM).
>
> Particularly for hardware, a BOM and a kitting/pick list are
> indispensable. Paul, I'd be stunned if your company did not have a BOM
> for the product that included the manual complete with its part number.
>
> My standards are based on many years' work in both the hardware and
> software sides of the computer business, in which I've done as much
> management/release work as anything else. I find that knowing "how the
> sausage is made" helps in integrating my documents into the company's
> overall process. In my new startup company, I'm finding I have to make
> up the process as I go!
>
> Joe
>
> Joe Malin
> Technical Writer
> (408)625-1623
> jmalin -at- tuvox -dot- com
> www.tuvox.com
> The views expressed in this document are those of the sender, and do not
> necessarily reflect those of TuVox, Inc.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: techwr-l-bounces+jmalin=tuvox -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+jmalin=tuvox -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On Behalf
> Of obair81 -at- comcast -dot- net
> Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 9:40 AM
> To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> Subject: doc release numbering
>
> Due to things beyond my control, we (I) had to turn out a doc set last
> week for a new hardware product, and next I will have to turn out
> another (updated) doc set for the same product. The product name/number
> have not changed.
>
> Is there any sort of standard for numbering versions of the docs, if the
> product is not changing?
>
> I have not dealt with this question before.
>
> The voice(s) of experience would be welcome.
>
> Thanks.
>
> best,
> Paul
WebWorks ePublisher Pro for Word features support for every major Help
format plus PDF, HTML and more. Flexible, precise, and efficient content
delivery. Try it today!. http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l