discuss: Clarifying confusion over editing vs reviewer
Subject:
Re: Clarifying confusion over editing vs reviewer
From:
Tabatha Persad ####@####.####
Date:
20 May 2002 21:06:12 -0000
Message-Id: <20020520210544.PIQK19355.sccrmhc03.attbi.com@there>
On Monday 20 May 2002 12:36, Joy Y Goodreau wrote:
> I'm not really concerned about what name you give to what me and my
> review staff, but I do want it to be clear what the
> reviewers/editors do at the LDP.
I can see that to many people the term editor still carries a stigma,
which is unfortunate. Either way, set it in stone and I'll update my
signature either way, no matter to me. I still enjoy doing whatever
it is being called!
> 1. They contact the author and let them know that they will be
> working with the document. This includes a request to work in the
> source. Most authors have responded favorably that we fix
> grammatical errors in the source. It creates less work for them and
> they seem to appreciate it. In the instances where source is
> changing rapidly or they anticipate making changes within the
> source before we can get the revision back to them, we don't work
> in the source. This is also an option for authors who do not want
> us to touch the source. I will tell you that this has been rare in
> my experience. The authors I have dealt with are eager to make the
> documentation better and more readable, and if we can save them
> time by working in the source, they are fine with it. It has been
> great to work with these authors who see their documents as
> belonging to the community and want them to be better.
What about conversion from older formats to DocBook? I'm not trying
to stir up a debate but it is my understanding that DB4.1 sgml and
4.1.2 XML are the most recent flavors. Is this something that is
being done in the same manner as above? I have noticed some
conversions mentioned in updates. Just curious.
> I must say that the authors responses to the new document editing
> has been phenomenal. Major improvements have been made to many of
> the documents. I have been impressed with the responsiveness of the
> authors. The new document reviews have been going on since April
> 23. IF your document was submitted before then, it was NOT subject
> to a review before going onto the site. The review for all new
> documents is a NEW policy. We had it as a goal for a year, and it
> became reality on April 23.
I have also had great experiences working with new authors and their
submissions! I've made sure that recommendations were followed by
logical reasons, and have offered my help (being fortunate enough to
have the time) to get through using some of the tools as well. I've
so far received great feedback. SGML and proper licenses are now
applicable where they were previously text files without this
information.
Joy, it was the detailed instructions you had emailed me that I used
once I got started! Bless you for sample emails and the not so
obvious things to look for.
While there has been much discussion on policy versus procedure, I'm
extremely interested in the procedure, because I believe this is what
drives the quality. Everyone will then know exactly what level of
service they will receive because it's spelled out. Maybe it should
be in the existing documentation - there seems to be division on the
idea of a separate guide for that. On my initial outline my attempt
was to cover the procedure. There should be enough information to
see very clearly what quality will result.
Although I may not work with the author when he or she submits
another document, it would be nice to know that the author is going
to receive a similar experience the next time. I guess given my
background that's what I call SOP (Standard Operating Procedure).
Maybe the policy is to follow the procedure? Just another way of
looking at it!
--
Tabatha Persad
Web: http://www.merlinmonroe.com
The Linux Counter Project Area Manager US:wa (http://counter.li.org)
Linux Documentation Project Editor (http://www.tldp.org)
Gnu Writing Movement Project Developer
(http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gwm)
