Advertisement

Computer Support for Producing Software Documentation: Some Possible Futures

  • Lyn Pemberton
  • Louise Gorman
  • Anthony Hartley
  • Richard Power

Abstract

The work we describe in this paper formed the background to two large government-funded projects, GIST and DRAFTER, which aim to provide intelligent tools for the automatic generation of multilingual versions of technical documents in two domains: administrative forms and software documentation, respectively.1 In order to draft a realistic set of requirements for the generation tools we intended to create, we felt it was necessary to acknowledge that they should not be seen as stand-alone tools. Instead, if they were to be accepted by writers, they would need to be integrated as closely as possible into the technical writers’ current use of computer tools and into their wider working practices.

Keywords

Machine Translation Computer Support British Standard Institution Natural Language Generation Documentation Process 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barrett, Edward (ed.) (1988). Text, Con Text and Hyper Text: Writing With and For the Computer. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  2. British Standards Institution. (1992–3). Technical Manuals - BS 4884. London: BSI.Google Scholar
  3. Brockmann, R. John. (1990). Writing Better Computer User Documentation. New York: John Wiley.MATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Chikofsky, E. J. and Rubenstein, B. L. (1988). CASE: Reliability engineering for information systems. IEEE Software 5 (2), pp. 11–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chisholm, Richard M. (1988). ‘Improving the Management of Technical Writers: Creating a Context for Usable Documentation’, in S. Doheny-Farina (ed.), Effective Documentation: What We Have Learned from Research. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  6. Constantine, L. L. and Yourdon, E. (1979). Structured Design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.MATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Doheny-Farina, Stephen (ed.). (1988). Effective Documentation: What We Have Learned from Research. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  8. Doheny-Farina, Stephen. (1992). Rhetoric, Innovation, Technology: Case Studies of Technical Communication in Technology Transfers. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. Duffy, Thomas M. (1995). ‘Designing Tools to Aid Technical Editors: A Needs Analysis’. Technical Communication 42 (2), pp. 262–77.Google Scholar
  10. Flower, L., Schriver, K. A., Carey, L., Haas, C. and Hayes, J. R. (1989). Planning in Writing: The Cognition of a Constructive Process (Tech. Rep. No. 34 ). Berkeley, CA: Center for the Study of Writing at University of California, Berkeley and Carnegie Mellon University.Google Scholar
  11. Grice, Roger A. (1988). ‘Information Development is Part of Product Development - Not an Afterthought’, in E. Barrett (ed.), Text, Con Text and Hyper Text: Writing With and For the Computer. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  12. Iordanskaya, L., Kim, M., Kittredge, R., Lavoie B. and Polguère, A. (1992). ‘Generation of Extended Bilingual Statistical Reports’. Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Computational Linguistics, 1019–23.Google Scholar
  13. Kittredge, Richard I. and Polguère, Alain (1991). ‘Generating Extended Bilingual Texts from Application Knowledge Bases’. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Fundamental Research for the Future Generation of Natural Language Processing, pp. 147–60. Kyoto: ATR Interpreting Telephony Research Laboratories.Google Scholar
  14. Lay, Mary M. and Karis, William M. (eds). (1991). Collaborative Writing in Industry: Investigations in Theory and Practice. Amityville, NY: Baywood.Google Scholar
  15. Lee, Arthur (1993). ‘Controlled English with and without Machine Translation’. Machine Translation Today. Proceedings of Translating and the Computer 15, 35–9. London: Aslib.Google Scholar
  16. Levine, Lawrence B. (1988). ‘Corporate Culture, Technical Documentation and Organisation Diagnosis’, in E. Barrett (ed.), Text, Con Text and Hyper Text: Writing With and For the Computer. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  17. Mrazek, Deborah and Rafeld, Michael (1992). ‘Integrating Human Factors on a Large Scale: Product Usability Champions’. Proceedings of CHI 1992, 565–70.Google Scholar
  18. Norman, Don A. (1988). The Psychology of Everyday Things. Basic Books: New York.Google Scholar
  19. Pym, Peter J. (1991). ‘Simplified English and Machine Translation’. Professional Translator and Interpreter 2, 5–9.Google Scholar
  20. Scholz, J and Hansen, M. (1993). ‘Usability Testing a Minimal Manual for the Intel Satis FA Xtion Faxmodem’. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication Vol. 36, No. 1, 7–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sharples, Mike, Goodlet, James and Pemberton, Lyn (1992). ‘Developing a Writer’s Assistant’, in J. Hartley (ed.), Technology and Writing: Readings in the Psychology of Written Communication, pp. 209–20. London: Kingsley.Google Scholar
  22. Smith, John B. and Lansman, Marcy (1992). ‘Designing Theory Based Systems: A Case Study’. Proceedings of CHI 1992, 479–88.Google Scholar
  23. Sproull, Lee and Kiesler, Sara (1992). Connections: New Ways of Working in the Networked Organisation. Second edition. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  24. Wilkin, Lorraine and Wulff, Wendie (1990). ‘Document Means More Than Manual: Document Design outside the Computer Industry’. Proceedings of SIGDOC 1990, 79–86.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lyn Pemberton
  • Louise Gorman
  • Anthony Hartley
  • Richard Power

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations