My Methodolgy of writing Documentation with Wikis
:
- First and foremost, if you're thinking about improving a product's documentation, read Kathy Sierra's How to get users to RTFM
. Make sure your documentation covers each of the five types required: Reference Guide, Tutorial, Learning/Understanding, Cookbook/Recipe, Start Here.
I would add that Wikis often lead to topic-oriented authoring, Norman Walsh has some interesting takes on the consequences of topic-oriented authoring
: Good for reference, bad for tutorial, learning and understanding, bad for start here documentation.
Scott Abel points me
to Tom Johnson's Using Wikis as Project Documentation Tools
. His main complaints are:
- Wiki wysiwig’s are primitive (technical documentation can have some complicated styles, with several levels of lists).
- Once all the info is in the wiki, how do I generate a manual or online help? I don’t want to maintain two separate files.
, nothing more and nothing less. But there are reasonable arguments for using Wikis and user-contributed feedback for documentation:
- I’m saying, let the technical writer use a wiki as his or her documentation base,” says Johnson. “Make sure all project members are familiar with the wiki’s location and procedures for editing it. Then, encourage the project team to comment, review, add, edit, and otherwise adjust the documentation through the life of the project. The writer can shape, stylize, make consistent, and organize the content to make it usable. Most likely the writer will write 75% of the content anyway, but it will be more informed and accurate.
My methodology of creating technical documentation uses Wikis in two places:
- I plan and organize the documentation project using an issue tracking system and create tasks for every step in the documentation process
- I 'harvest' product development Wikis for information about the software I am documenting. This is the first use of Wikis - a source of information
- I create a content outline of the planned document in the Wiki and invite other team members to comment and correct the content outline. The Wiki here is a space for distributed brain-storming.
- I write the document using DocBook-XML, WYSIWYG-XML-editors and share the in-progress document and illustrations using a version control system. As I am using DocBook and Mindquarry's file sharing, concurrent editing of modular documents is easy.
- Reviewers and copy-editor use the issue tracking system to create comments and remarks to the documentation.
- After releasing the document, the issue tracking system is used to track comments and suggestions for improvements. As the Wiki keeps evolving I have a good starting point for a second revison of the document.
I am Product Manager for Collaboration and Digital Asset Management at
Posted by Mindquarry Blog on February 07, 2007 at 11:59 AM CET #
Thanks for sharing your method. You wrote,
"I write the document using DocBook-XML, WYSIWYG-XML-editors and share the in-progress document and illustrations using a version control system. As I am using DocBook and Mindquarry's file sharing, concurrent editing of modular documents is easy."
Can you elaborate on this more, particularly the concurrent editing of modular documents?
Posted by Tom Johnson on February 08, 2007 at 02:29 PM CET #
I am using DocBook-XML. This format has support for document inclusions via the XInclude mechanism. This makes it easy to split one document (book) into multiple physical files (e.g. one for each chapter). When processing the DocBook document, to the DocBook processing tool it still looks like one single DocBook document.
Concurrent editing becomes possible thanks to the fact that DocBook is XML and basically text based and thus version control systems like Subversion (and Mindquarry, which extends Subversion) can merge changes between two concurrent edits. So there is no more need to wait for the reviewer to finish his review before I can continue writing.
Posted by Lars Trieloff on February 09, 2007 at 12:27 PM CET #