Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
Peter, you have described our current process. I think it has served
us well, and will continue to serve us well. If Gary wants to
introduce an extra step into the process for the Writer Guide, that's
a useful experiment, but personally I think it just complicates
matters. OTOH, if Gary's process results in better docs without extra
delays, then that's good. I certainly don't object to improving on the
existing system.
Because we do not utilize proofreaders and such, having anybody
accepting that role AND/OR for anybody to serve as a peer reviewer of
the chapters just before inserting them in the published state (where
they will most likely NEVER be further reviewed or anything) is an ever
present risk. We should strive for removing our errors at every step and
not make a rush to publish when it would be a simple task for some to do
so. All it requires is asking that we need proofers and indexers at the
end and additional reviewers at any intermediate steps.
<some exposition>
Hopefully, I might be successful in my recruiting college students for
technical editors and writers. Unfortunately, being summer "up over,"
it's vacation time. I will give Jean the contact information for the
head of the technical writing & editing division at the Professional
Development Department from the College of Engineering at my alma
mater--the University of Wisconsin in the People's Republic of Madison.
This department head said that she was definitely interested in seeing
some volunteers from her department getting involved in OOoAuthors. It's
about time to talk to her and then afterwards see if any other colleges
want to participate.
If successful, we should be able to have more warm bodies so that we all
can have our errors corrected. We may have far more folks than we need.
That means that they could do even more than what we have been doing.
Perhaps, some pertinent tutorials, some SME researchers, etc., using
college "interns" who might not otherwise have any projects in mind when
they start their fall semester.
I'd like them to use the forum so that everybody knows what the others
are up to, scheduling subprojects, asking for help and giving advice,
and not boggling down the message list with every triviality. Also, I
want to thank our new author--jf--for tweaking the forum into its
current shape and having it ready for when some new writer and editors
and others come aboard. I see that Jean posted two new subprojects there
"today"--actually tomorrow here in Detroit, the 19th.
</exposition>
Then, after at least a minimal effort is made to check these chapters,
they can be inserted in the folder as published with their flaws
removed. Be advised that the vast majority of my editing efforts came
from these very same published chapters that I warned about. And we know
how many errors of all kind were lurking there. Having somebody checking
ME is what I want, so as to avoid what transpired before. I welcome
having MY errors and omissions reported, commented on, and whatever.
More later...
Gary
