AI 中文总结
本研究通过对31名资深技术撰写人员访谈，明确软件文档评审的五个阶段及相关挑战，将文档评审定位为关键协作工作领域，为流程与工具优化提供新方向。
AI 中文摘要
企业将文档工作分配给技术撰写人员，但制作文档所需的知识分散在开发者、管理者及其他从业者手中。现有研究已确立了评判“优质”文档的质量标准，但尚未考察从业者如何运用专业知识提升文档质量，或他们在此过程中面临的挑战。本研究通过对来自不同机构的31名资深技术撰写人员进行半结构化访谈，揭示了维持文档质量所需的个体及协作努力。我们确定了文档评审流程的五个 distinct 阶段：自我评审、技术评审、编辑评审、原型测试及发布后反馈。每个阶段均吸纳具备不同专业知识的从业者，以解决内容、呈现及用户体验层面的质量问题。研究结果显示，撰写人员在招募专家评审者、协调开发时间线，以及应对并非专为文档工作流程设计的工具时，面临组织与技术层面的挑战。本研究将文档评审定位为一项关键却未被充分研究的协作工作领域，并为流程改进与工具支持开辟了新的研究和设计方向。
英文摘要
Organizations assign documentation work to technical writers, yet the knowledge required to produce it is distributed across developers, managers, and other practitioners. Prior work has established quality criteria for judging "good" documentation, but it has not examined how practitioners bring that expertise to improve documentation quality or the challenges they face in doing so. Through semi-structured interviews with experienced technical writers ($n=31$) from different organizations, our work reveals the individual and collaborative effort required to maintain documentation quality. We identify five distinct stages of the documentation review process: self review, technical review, editorial review, play testing, and post-publication feedback. Each stage draws on practitioners with distinct expertise to address quality across content, presentation, and user experience. Our findings surface organizational and technical challenges writers face in recruiting expert reviewers, navigating development timelines, and contending with tools not specifically designed for documentation workflows. Our work positions documentation review as a crucial yet understudied site of collaborative work and opens new research and design directions for process improvement and tool support.
CommentsAccepted at GROUP 2027, 30 pages
