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.
Gurpreet Singh provided additional information: <<I work in Electronic
Test and Measurement industry.>>
In that case, I suspect that IEEE (www.ieee.org) will have a SIG that
can provide information on this if nobody on techwr-l has a good
recommendation. In fact, some of your engineers or developers probably
already belong to an appropriate SIG and can introduce you to its
members and resources.
<<I'm concentrating not on the writing part but on the review process;
like peer review, technical review et al. Do we have a formal process
for this?>>
Again, I'm not aware of any broad standards. In fact, that's why I
wrote my article. My goal was more to propose a toolkit for
constructing your own process.
<<In addition, is 'document review cycle' industry dependent?>>
Yes, but only in the narrow sense that some industries may have
specific legal and other requirements that must be met. In that case,
you may need to add a specific review phase related to those
requirements.
In regards to your Web search for methodologies, you said: <<Most of
the listed processes are good but impossible to follow, partly because
reviewers have very limited time and we can't ask for more than our
share. Unfortunately, that share is very less as well and which is why
I want to create a process so that this time is used effectively.>>
Have a look at my bibliography
(http://www.geoff-hart.com/resources/bibliography.html), and skim
through the titles or search for the keyword "review". There are
several other articles there that discuss (sometimes satirically) the
obstacles to reviews and how to overcome those obstacles.
<<I thought to start with the standard processes first, and then keep
fine tuning those processes to fit my needs.>>
Except that there are no standard processes, that's a good choice.
Processes do eventually become somewhat sclerotic, and need to be
reinvigorated. Plus, as times and circumstances change, processes
gradually diverge from reality and must change to accomodate them
(http://www.geoff-hart.com/resources/2005/living.htm).
<<I really liked the doc freeze idea. I wonder if it is 100% effective
in my organization.>>
"Freezes" of any type, from documentation to software design, are
always possible and effective. But they must have strong support
throughout the organization. Unfortunately, there's a pernicious flaw
in the mindset of modern managers that tells them the goal of
development is to keep adding and refining features right up until the
product ships. This is clearly nonsense, but it's become the new gospel
for managers. That doesn't mean that _we_ should accept it without a
fight.
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
Doc-To-Help includes a one-click RoboHelp project converter. It's that easy. Watch the demo at http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
