-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
Initial commit with the first draft of the personae for the toolchain… #11
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from 1 commit
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ | ||
| # toolchain | ||
| This folder is the holding place for planning documentation for The Good Docs Toolchain, a project to create a collection of tools to make authoring technical documentation easier. |
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,56 @@ | ||||||||||
| --- | ||||||||||
| title: The Good Docs Toolchain | ||||||||||
| --- | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| This document summarizes the personae for The Good Docs Toolchain, a collection of tools designed to help users create better technical documentation. | ||||||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. As per meeting discussion, it appears "personas" is more commonly used than "personae". Find and replace in rest of doc. Filename should change too. |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| The following are the primary types of users (i.e. personae) targeted by this toolchain. Each has a number of distinct needs, as outlined in the below sections. | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| # Tech writer | ||||||||||
acpkendo marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| The **Tech Writer** is an individual whose primary role is authoring technical documentation. These may be volunteers in open source projects or employees in commercial organizations. They will typically have a certain level of technical proficiency, although this will range from a simple understanding of technical concepts to full proficiency with tools such as the command line. | ||||||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggested change
|
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| As a tech writer... | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| - I want to use a simple tool to manage docs-as-code so I can concentrate on writing. | ||||||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'd split "simple tool for docs-as-code" from "concentrate on writing", as they are two interdependent tasks, each deserving their own bullet point. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'd also maybe remove "simple" as that's quite an assumption, I certainly don't want a "simple" toolchain, I want a "comprehensive" one… |
||||||||||
| - I want to have access to spell/grammar check so I can take advantage of existing tools. | ||||||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggested change
I'm not sure about the taking advantage bit. How does having access to linting enable this? Personally (as a technical writer) I want to have access to spelling and grammar checking to reduce the mental burden of doing it manually, as well as to catch inadvertent errors before they are committed. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'd generalise this too, more along the lines of what @Loquacity says…
Suggested change
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. There are more things offered by Google Docs and other editors which are either provided on on the wish list which I think should be mentioned:
|
||||||||||
| - I want to have the option to use the editor of my choice so I don't have to learn something new. | ||||||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think you mean WYSIWYG editing? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Not just to avoid learning something new (most writers I suspect are not averse to this, generally), but more about using existing and familiar tools. I also think there's something deeply personal about a writer's editor: we spend a lot of time setting them up, and tend to hang on to them once we have one we like. Not sure how to encapsulate all that in a user story though 😂 There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. For me this whole project has been about integration, and I appreciate this isn't always possible, but maybe the toolchain is more about "glue" than new tools. |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| # Developer | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| Often times **Developers** are called on to document the code or application they've created. In business this may be a matter of convenience, where in open source projects there may simply not be anyone else available. But in either case this is a secondary task added to their main roles, often without enough thought given to the effort required to produce something of quality. These individuals are (obviously) very technically savvy, although this doesn't preclude them from wanting to use GUI tools. | ||||||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggested change
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I have a dissenting opinion in the world of engineering that all engineers should always be documenting... and that it isn't a nice to have or optional. But it is something that should be part of what engineers do. That is my point-of-view and maybe not the good-docs project? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. +1 to @mgan59 . It takes a village to raise good docs. Engineers, should have a significant role to play if quality docs are to be created efficiently. |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| As a developer... | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| - I want help in deciding what form the required documentation should take so I don't need to learn technical writing theory. | ||||||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This is good and to build here -- there are lots of types of documentation and tooling that developers are unaware of... I'm a huge fan of ADRS: Architecture Decisions Records which are often over-looked. There are multiple forms of the There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggested change
|
||||||||||
| - I want help to stage the required documentation so I don't need to create everything from scratch. | ||||||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggested change
I think of staging as being a thing you do to preview work, not as a starting point. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. @Loquacity I think the templates and guides go in the prior use case. |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| # Reviewer | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| **Reviewers** can take many forms, from technical leads and delivery managers responsible for the solution as a whole to subject matter experts who may be getting their first look at the solution they themselves will use. The reviewer's role is to look over the documentation and provide *feedback* to be incorporated back into the material. | ||||||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggested change
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Maybe we need to clarify the difference between a technical and non-technical reviewer here too. |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| As a reviewer... | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| - I want to look review the documentation in its final presentation so I can better visualize how it's used. | ||||||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I want to be able to look at / review the documentation in its final presentation so I can better visualize how it's used. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'm not sure how much this is needed, and again I think integrating with existing tools is the better option… detect an SSG config file, setup a build task… Want HTML, use pandoc or equivelant, etc etc |
||||||||||
| - I want the ability to easily add comments to it so the review process is easy to track. | ||||||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggested change
|
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| As a technical reviewer... | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| - I want the ability to make corrections directly in the documentation's source so I don't need to go through the review process. | ||||||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Hrm. Do they? Also, what about "I want access to a test version of the product being documented, so that I can ensure the steps in the documentation are accurate". There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This is an interesting statement. I think there can be some cases where someone may want to change docs and avoid a PR. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. But at the same-time, if changes are happening for a specific version or have massive impact, those changes should go through a review process. so just a caveat. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'm inclined to drop this requirement: |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| # Marketing | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| While **Marketing** reviewer are the same as technical reviewers in many ways (and many of the same needs will apply), they are also looking after the company's branding, and therefore may have additional requirements. | ||||||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I would put these under the reviewers heading, and split reviewers into categories. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggested change
I don't think this is necessarily true. They're closer to non-technical reviewers in my experience. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. as I was touching on, there is a growing demand for mar-tech professionals that are front-end developers that can integrate into design-teams. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'd suggest here to expanding this as to be inclusive of |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| As a marketing reviewer... | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| - I want the ability to comment on the look-and-feel of the deliverables, so I can ensure they're in line with the brand. | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| # Technology decision-maker | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| The **Technology Decision Maker** may weigh in on the documentation as a | ||||||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Missing a description here. I'm guessing it's someone like a development manager or product owner? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think Product-Owner / Product-Designers are missing here as I'd mentioned on the call the idea of design-system tooling like - storybook docs. And think |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| As a technology decision maker... | ||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| - I want to provide feedback on the approach to the deliverable(s), to ensure it's meeting expectations as part of the overall solution. | ||||||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggested change
|
||||||||||
| - I want to enforce the docs-as-code approach, to ensure it's in line with my high-level strategy for the product(s). | ||||||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggested change
"Enforce" seems a little heavy handed. I'm also not entirely certain this is true. Most managers/POs don't understand or particularly care about docs as code (in my experience). There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I kinda like this statement -- I think that we should draw a line in the sand from a values-perspective. That doc-as-code is the future for building scale-able and inclusive teams. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think there are a few more personas worth calling out, which I've been listing in my tech writing pattern presentations: |
||||||||||
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.