X-Edit setup could be improved for reviewers

[NorthEast]

That's great - thanks.

Please make the default email text editable too!

[kelly1210]

It is editable, you just can't save it. For now, I'm keep a Notepad text file with my preferred text and copy and paste it to the topics I send out for review. I also change it for specific situations or reviewers.

Or, am I misunderstanding your request?

[NorthEast]

What I suggested at the start was

- I would like to change the default email message to include my own standard text. Although you can edit the message before you send the topic, it doesn't remember the changes the next time you send a topic. So, if I have any standard text that I want to include, then I have to add it every single time.

[Cecily]

I used X-Edit for the first time today - or rather, one of my reviewers did.

No complex download any more and she found it pretty straightforward in general.

Our main gripes:

• The reviewer found it a little irritating to have to switch between Edit and Annotate modes.
• I was annoyed that there doesn't seem to be a way to compare her version with the original, or track changes etc, other than by eye, or asking her to annotate every edit (but I've made a separate post about that).

[RamonS]

Our main gripes:

• The reviewer found it a little irritating to have to switch between Edit and Annotate modes.
• I was annoyed that there doesn't seem to be a way to compare her version with the original, or track changes etc, other than by eye, or asking her to annotate every edit (but I've made a separate post about that).

Isn't that the same way in Word? You are in edit mode by default, but have to do something extra to annotate and once done leave that mode.

The other issue was mentioned by others as well and I'd be surprised if the next version doesn't cover that quite large oversight.

[peregrine]

I haven't looked at X-Edit in a while and am getting ready to do so again - can anyone tell me if there's a way now to set conditions so reviewers see only the parts of a topic they should? We write for multiple audiences and not being able to set conditions results in some very confusing text for reviewers.

[Cecily]

Isn't that the same way in Word? You are in edit mode by default, but have to do something extra to annotate and once done leave that mode.

Well, in Word, you are in edit mode and it's just one click to add an annotation and you can immediately continue with normal editing afterwards. From what my reviewer said, in X-Edit she had to toggle mode each time and also click to insert each annotation. People are lazy; if it's too many steps, they won't bother to edit and annotate.

The other issue was mentioned by others as well and I'd be surprised if the next version doesn't cover that quite large oversight.

I hope so. I've logged the need for revision marks and/or a Compare function as a feature request and expect others have done so too.

[TheGreatAndPowerfulOz]

- If there is a snippet associated with the topic being sent out for review, images in the snippet do not appera in the review topic (shows up as missing image link). Also, when using X-Edit, reviewers cannot edit content in the associated snippet.

I second this request to include snippet images (really, any required files which exist at a "deeper level" in the project than the current topic) for the following reasons:

• The topic content is confusing to non-Flare/non-techie types, who may not know what all the "missing file" stuff in their editor means.
• An attempt by a Contribute user to generate output (PDF or otherwise) will be missing the some of the content—in our particular case, the company logo and other information in the document header!

[RoyTheWriter]

I've logged the need for revision marks and/or a Compare function as a feature request and expect others have done so too.

I second this one. Some of my reviewers write quite well so I'm happy to let them do it and reduce the amount of time required from both of us, but I have to compare the versions somehow outside of Flare to see what they've changed.

[phanna]

I agree with all the comments that I have read on this thread. In addition, it would be nice to have a download that isn't 104 MB for reviewers. I just ran a test with a colleague and this is nasty - is Madcap considering having a "review only" download?

Thanks,
Paula

[RamonS]

Windows users should be used to bloated downloads, just look at the Microsoft patches. Most .NET apps are huge, not everybody sees the benefit of tight executables, for example the ones Delphi makes.

[danielg]

Yesterday 7/28 I submitted everything required to install X-Edit, and I'm still waiting for that email to return. So, my humble two bits: provide a review tool download that's as easy to install & use as Adobe Reader, but with annotations capability that your reviewers will find intuitive and almost fun to use. It's tough enough to recruit a review team from our busy engineers, without adding serious disincentive for them to ever bother with you again. You know you're in for it when you hear the whine "nobody looks at the documentation anyway"... . Thanks for listening & cheers, , =dg=

[stealth94rt]

I would like to see X-Edit work on an entire project versus a single topic.

In other words, I would like to dump a Flare project out to a shared (network) drive and then send an email to my reviewers that points to the project file. Then they can navigate and review all the topics in that project, and notify me when they're done. Some of our projects are huge (hundreds of topic files). It would be inefficient, irritating, and overwhelming to send/manage an email review request for each topic in a project.

[SteveS]

You all know the drill! (Helps MVPs to keep their post count up, as well)

Add your feature requests (and bugs) here.

The more requests foe an enhancement, the more likely Madcap are to heed your request!

[biking_gator]

Has this issue been fixed? I have X-Edit V1.2 and don't see that it is... I also don't like the idea of reviewers using the 30 day copy sitch, then getting the X-Edit review for free after...

[ccardimon]

Improvement really means a vast simplification. My most recent supervisor took an honest look at the instructions, decided he didn't have the time to figure it all out, and said as much. My other reviewers fell right into line behind him.

The people here could be persuaded to do the X-Edit thing, but simplification is the name of the game. What I'm going now is building PDFs and attaching that output to email messages that I send to my new supervisor.

That is simple and easy and quick. Save attachment to desktop. Read it there or print it out and scribble notes on it.

X-Edit has to RIVAL that for ease. It's must be push-button simple, easy, and quick. People aren't doing two or three jobs anymore. Now they are doing three or four jobs at once.

We're a small company that is surviving the recession. We're scrambling to make a buck. E-Edit has to fit -- smoothly -- into that scramble.

[Diana_BB]

I second that!

We tried to get our SMEs to use X-Edit, too--exact same response. They want PDFs they can annotate.

Diana

[ccardimon]

We tried to get our SMEs to use X-Edit, too--exact same response. They want PDFs they can annotate.

The latest thing is I don't even get annotated PDFs back. I get called into someone's office and they scroll through the PDF, ticking off the things they don't like that I need to fix, and I get to take notes -- FAST. Because they're not going through it again.

[RamonS]

Do you use the same procedure for software QA as well? Do the developers stop at the desk of the QA analyst to have the analyst scroll through the pages quickly so that the developer can take notes on what needs fixing?
As mentioned many times before, treating documentation the same way as source code will cause good things to happen. The same quality requirements applied to the software should be applied to documentation as well. Those who just want to do a quick job on reviewing docs really need to ask themselves if that is the right thing to do. I guess I'm barking up the wrong tree.

[ccardimon]

In a perfect world, documentation would be given the same treatment as source code, but that is not going to happen any time soon.

Previously, one person was reviewing my docs. After he left, no one was. Now, another person is reviewing my docs again.

I'm just glad to have another pair of eyes look at what I produce. It might not be an ideal type of review, but at least the material is getting reviewed.

[RamonS]

The QA department should review the docs. That is what I do and it takes as much time as does testing mods and fixes.

[ccardimon]

The QA department should review the docs. That is what I do and it takes as much time as does testing mods and fixes.

Our company is so small I don't believe there is a QA Department.

[RamonS]

So who does the QA on the software? Nobody? And you are not part of the development department or the QA team? Sorry for asking this, but that is where a tech writer is usually located.

[ccardimon]

So who does the QA on the software?

No idea. Not my table.

And you are not part of the development department or the QA team? Sorry for asking this, but that is where a tech writer is usually located.

I am part of the DEV group, but I do whatever I am asked. Mostly large user guide bibles for proprietary software applications. I am the first and only tech writer in a company that has been around for 20 years. There might be a QA team but I am unaware of any such animal. I think the "team" might be whoever happens to be "free" at the moment.

[RamonS]

Interesting.... but with 20 years in business the approach apparently works. I'd still investigate if there is a QA 'team'. We are working towards a more formal review process here where I work. I submit annotated PDFs instead of printing the docs, scribbling notes on them, scanning them in, mailing them to the tech writer, and then having him call me because he cannot read what I wrote. Would be nice if I could convince the team to use the bug tracker for documentation bugs as well, but so far we do it via email and the QA folks just need to keep in mind what needs to be changed and then watch out that it really happens. That is mildly successful and could be improved, but there is some resistance.