discuss: Clarifying confusion over editing vs reviewer
Subject:
Re: Clarifying confusion over editing vs reviewer
From:
Tabatha Persad ####@####.####
Date:
28 May 2002 18:49:42 -0000
Message-Id: <20020528184915.KGFC11426.rwcrmhc51.attbi.com@there>
On Tuesday 28 May 2002 03:58, David Lawyer wrote:
> > > 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.
>
> [snip]
>
> > > > 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.
>
> The method of showing them what needs changing and letting the
> authors make the change is better for the authors since they learn
> by this experience. Otherwise, they don't improve at all if their
> work just gets modified by someone else. But I know that it's
> easier for both parties for us to just make changes in the author's
> work. Do we offer as an equal alternative, the communicating of
> the changes needed to the author and point out that they will learn
> from this experience?
> Another route would be to run wdiff (or the like) on the "before"
> and "after" versions and send the author this diff. Use the
> options with wdiff that will show up the changes best.
I agree with that concept which is why I always send a diff file, a
copy of the original, and an email with lots of notes. In fact, I
have done this with both new and existing docs, and this has been
received extremely well by the authors I have worked with. I also
like to ask about conversion before I go ahead with it.
I feel that it's my obligation to put my changes in the open and
clearly mark them. If someone has a reason why they don't want
something to be changed, it's a lot easier to find with a diff file!
I also make sure to attach explanations with changes. If I can't
provide the author with a good reason for a change, then I shouldn't
change it! This has never happened, but this process makes it much
easier.
Also, in most cases (except the authors who don't reply) I've had the
author tell me to go ahead and do it this way. I get the impression
that authors don't mind someone else having a read of their docs to
look for anything they may have missed. Could be that editing is a
tedious process they might want to allow someone else to do.
Tabatha
