Re: Leading and Bleeding Edge?

[Robert Lauriston <robert -at- lauriston -dot- com>]

This happens to me over and over: an engineer mentions a product that
they think has great documentation. I look at their docs for a few
minutes and see that (1) the product is very simple and (2) the docs
are nevertheless only around 10-50% complete.

So, sure, that looks nice and clean compared with the comprehensive
documentation I've produced for a product that's 100 times as complex.

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Tom Johnson <tomjohnson1492 -at- gmail -dot- com> wrote:
>
> ... bleeding edge tools is that they rarely satisfy the
> requirements placed on tech writers. People want modern-looking,
> interactive websites. Then they also explain on that they need PDF
> generation, translation, multi-edit capabilities, single source generation,
> workflows, and document statuses, etc. By the time the list of requirements
> is finalized, about the only tools that satisfy them are more traditional
> tech comm tools. ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Visit TechWhirl for the latest on content technology, content strategy and content development | http://techwhirl.com

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- 

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com


Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources and info.

Looking for articles on Technical Communications?  Head over to our online magazine at http://techwhirl.com

Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions?  Search our public email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives