OT - Using a Defect Tracking System to Create a Glossary

[Roopa Belur]

Thanks, David, for your response. I should have furnished more details, sorry about that.

The localization team in our company does use a legacy in-house system to add, review and edit terms and definitions to the "localized" glossary. This process has proved to be efficient and self-sufficient, however, it requires a considerable amount of developmental effort to replicate the same process and workflow for our (documentation) project. Our intent is to create a global file of terms and definitions and provide a read access to the others teams in the company.

 We have evaluated Wiki and Confluence as well, and it does not appear to fulfill our needs. We are talking at least 3000 to 4000 terms and definitions here.

Siebel was suggested to us, and I was wondering if anyone has used a defect tracking tool for glossary purposes before. Siebel is primarily a CRM tool, so am trying to understand better how we could use it to build a database of glossary terms and definitions.

Rgds,
Roopa

 
"This is my simple religion. There is no need for temples; no need for complicated philosophy. Our own brain, our own heart is our temple; the philosophy is kindness."       

--H.H. the Dalai Lama




________________________________
 From: David Artman <david at davidartman.com>
To: Roopa Belur <rbelur at yahoo.com>; Framers <framers at lists.frameusers.com> 
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 10:13 PM
Subject: RE: OT - Using a Defect Tracking System to Create a Glossary
 
I might be the only one confused... but what is the point of a defect
tracker to develop a glossary? Are you trying to use the tracker as a
means of handling review and edit? I mean... there's TONS of ways to
handle such a workflow, if the goal is merely:
* Someone comes up with a new term for the glossary, and defines it.
* The term and definition is shopped around various SMEs and interested
parties, for comments/edits.
* The term is added to some kind of FM file/book and the deliverable
(CHM file?) is re-generated and re-published.

Hell, it could be done with an Outlook task or an email chain; it could
be done on an internal, developmental wiki; it could be done in a
regular (e.g., weekly, monthly) meeting for all new term additions at
once.

I guess... uh, I guess I just don't understand why this is even a
question? Can you provide further details about tools limitations,
contributor requirements/restrictions, or other business needs that
might be impacting your choice of workflows, which is leading you to
reach out for advice...?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.frameusers.com/pipermail/framers-frameusers.com/attachments/20120824/300f8fb9/attachment.htm>