Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Portland, Maine, USA
    Posts
    296
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    File Naming Conventions for Versions (Word 2003)

    I have people using a lot of different systems for naming documents and for naming documents for keeping track of versions. None of them seem 'perfect'. What are people using for naming conventions for tracking versions that seems to work consistently?

    And no - I do not want to use Word's 'versions' because the documents are very regularly emailed and we don't want the versions sent with them.

  2. #2
    Super Moderator jscher2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Silicon Valley, USA
    Posts
    23,112
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 93 Times in 89 Posts

    Re: File Naming Conventions for Versions (Word 200

    Before we got our document management system, I had people name files with the date first, e.g., 2005-12-06 Agreement with so and so.doc. Then they sorted correctly within the folder. You can add version 2, version 3, etc. Basically, we used the file name. However, if you wouldn't want the date or version number disclosed, then this is not a very effective system. Particularly in Word 2000, which stored a hidden history of the save paths in the metadata.

  3. #3
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Portland, Maine, USA
    Posts
    296
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: File Naming Conventions for Versions (Word 200

    What did you put in for a DMS? Has it worked well and how well did people react to it?

  4. #4
    Super Moderator jscher2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Silicon Valley, USA
    Posts
    23,112
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 93 Times in 89 Posts

    Re: File Naming Conventions for Versions (Word 200

    We got WORLDOX. Those who had used DOCS Open or iManage were happy to have a DMS, even if it was a bit different. Those who were used to the complete freedom to lose files all over the place were less enthusiastic.

    Of course, as with any initiative, planning is really critical. Particularly things like "document type description" for which some people thought "less is more" (simpler up front) but now regret (can't drill down to what I want).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •