doc release numbering

[Beth Agnew]

I issue a second edition. If you want to use internal part numbers that 
have some indication of version, that's fine, but I'd keep that inside 
the front cover and not particularly visible to the user. Part numbers 
can get confusing for users, especially if they only differ by a couple 
of numerals. The user has to decode it every time they look at it. The 
user needs to be able to know quickly that it is an updated doc set when 
they pick it up, so Wichadidjit 3.1 User Guide becomes Wichadidjit 3.1 
User Guide (Second Edition). Alternatively, you could say Wichadidjit 
3.1 User Guide (Updated) but I prefer the former.

If the changes are few, you could issue an Addendum rather than reissue 
the docs, but it depends on what one defines as "few".

Dates are also very good for letting users know which manual is most 
recent. Wichadidjit 3.1 User Guide with an issue date somewhere either 
on the cover or on the copyright page April 2006, is clearly 
distinguishable from Wichadidjit 3.1 User Guide (Second Edition) with an 
issue date of June 2006. If you don't like the bracketed Second Edition, 
you could just use the date, with or without Updated in front of it. Use 
whatever works for the design of your publication.

--Beth

obair81 at comcast.net wrote:
> 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?
>   
-- 
Beth Agnew
Presenting "Podcasting & Vidcasting: The Future of TechComm"
at the STC Conference, Las Vegas, NV, 2 p.m. May 10, 2006

Professor, Technical Communication
Seneca College of Applied Arts & Technology
Toronto, ON 416.491.5050 x3133
http://www.tinyurl.com/83u5u