On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 20:42:37 +0300 David Nelson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Jean, > OK, the workflow we originally set-up on Alfresco is a bit like Snakes > & Ladders. The doc start in the "Drafts" folder. A considered-ready > draft gets approved and goes forward to the "Review" folder. A > reviewer proofreads it, and either it gets approved and gets moved > forward to the "Publish" folder, or it gets rejected and goes back to > "Drafts". The act of approval or rejection (it wasn't always actually > used) was to click on one of two menu options in the right-hand menu > that appears when your mouse pointer hovers over the document. The > result was that Alfresco would move the document to one folder or the > other. > Reviewing and proofreading are two very different activities. A reviewer needs to be knowledgeable about the software being described, so that he/she can check the accuracy of every statement made about it. A proofreader is looking for quite different things: errors, infelicities of style, bad cross-references, figures that don't show what they're supposed to, etc. Logically this should be the last stage before publication, when the reviewers have done all they want to. But your work flow scheme doesn't allow for this. > Question: The workflow described on the wiki involves 4 roles - > Writer, Reviewer, Editor, Publisher. Could we usefully simplify that > to Writer and Reviewer? Editor and Publisher could potentially be > eliminated, because of my file-naming suggestion below. > You can't eliminate the editor for the reasons given above. Reviewers aren't editors. The two jobs need different types of thinking. > Possible different solution > =================== > > Have 2 folders for each manual: "Work-in-progress" and "Published". > > All work gets done on the file in "Work-in-progress" and there is only > ever one file for each chapter of a manual in the "Work-in-progress" > folder. > > Alfresco's versioning system updates the version number of the file > each time someone uploads some work done (via "Upload new version" > under "More..."). One can easily roll back to a previous version > number if necessary, or download an old version number if desired. > > Each worker enters a comment in the Alfresco comment box when > uploading, stating the work done (and/or in a comment field in the > document meta data). > > The same file is used even when work starts on updating a chapter to > take account of a new version of LibreOffice. In this case, the > LibreOffice version number is updated by a team member in the file's > meta data. You don't have to worry about incrementing any file version > number in the meta data, because Alfresco is handling the version > numbering. > So how will people know when something needs a review? Or a final edit/proofreading? The traditional way was to put it in a specific folder whose contents could be checked up on periodically. If you don't do that, it would have to be done via the mailing list. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/documentation/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
