-------------------- Bill Swallow wrote: Yeah but "perfect" and "useful" are not the same, and I would take useful over perfect any day. Striving for useful is far more beneficial than striving for perfect. --------------------
I think Bill has a wonderful point, and it goes along with an example I gave to a coworker this morning. If our technical editor misses a small grammatical error but points out that something that I wrote in one spot contradicts something elsewhere (in my manual or someone else's), I consider that a good trade-off. Of course, it would be nice to find and fix both problems, but if I have to choose one, resolving a contradiction would be of much higher value (a matter of usefulness) than correcting a grammar problem (a matter of perfection). When I started working for Zebra, I took over several user guides and found some serious issues with them. Sections that should have been identical between manuals weren't. Sections that should have existed in all manuals didn't. Sections that needed graphics didn't have any. I saw what the problems were, but I couldn't fix everything that was wrong in each manual before releasing it because I had deadlines to meet. Instead of crying (much!) about what I couldn't fix, I focused on fixing one issue with each manual that I released, and I learned to live with the rest in the meantime. I also found a way to share much of my content between manuals so that a change made in one place would automatically be brought into the next manual that was released. Any new manuals started with the latest and greatest content and built on it. Now 3-1/2 years later, all of the major errors and inconsistencies are gone from my manuals, and I'm focusing on rewriting to cut down on translation costs. That wasn't something that we could consider before because there were too many larger, glaring problems. Notice that I said that the "major" errors and inconsistencies are gone. I'm sure there are still some smaller ones, but I'll get them eventually! Had I focused on achieving perfection with the manuals that I took over, I would have missed many deadlines trying to change everything, and the odds are good that I would have missed things anyway. But because I focused on improving usefulness, I was able to consistently turn out something that was better than something else was previously, which was a step in the right direction. After a few iterations, everything is now up to a much higher standard than previously, and perfection is slowly creeping up on us. Which is of higher quality? Something that is grammatically perfect but seriously disorganized or blatantly wrong or something that has a grammar error or two but is organized and correct? I vote for the second. Usefulness trumps perfection when you have to choose between them. Happy Friday! Donna - CONFIDENTIAL- This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential, and may also be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not review, use, copy, or distribute this message. If you receive this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply email and then delete this email. ______________________________________________ Author Help files and create printed documentation with Doc-To-Help. New release adds Team Authoring Support, enhanced Web-based help technology and PDF output. Learn more at www.doctohelp.com/tcp. DOCUMENTATION & TRAINING WEST 07: THE USER EXPERIENCE April 18-21, 2007 ~ Vancouver BC ~ Marriott Pinnacle ~ free city tour 40+ sessions * free workshops * free iPod offer * www.doctrain.com _______________________________________________ Technical Communication Professionals Post a message to the list: email [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, unsubscribe, archives, account options, list info: http://techcommpros.com/mailman/listinfo/tcp_techcommpros.com Subscribe (email): send a blank message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe (email): send a blank message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Need help? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] Get the TCP whole experience! http://www.techcommpros.com
