Document Version Numbering

[venkat]

I would like to know whether the version numbering can be continuous starting from 1.0 , then1.1, 1.2, 1.3 etc.

If a major change is done then the higher digit is to be followed or it can be incremented by the next decimal. For example after 1.0 if some major change is carried out , then the new version is 1.1 or 2.0

There seems to be different views on this. Generally the two versions should be distinguishable and the numbering should not matter.

Can I have the views of others please.

 

[CarolX]

Venkat,

You method seems sound, but there seems to be some confusion amoung you co-workers. Perhaps you should reach an agreement, defining how to identify versions, and that write a quick work instruction for reference? Personally, I do not like the incremental change numbering system. If the procedure is revised, it goes to the next number/letter. I do provide an "out" in my system. If I am making a correction for syntax, spelling or typing errors, no revision change is required.

Good Luck,
CarolX

 

[Cheryl]

"There seems to be different views on this. Generally the two versions should be distinguishable and the numbering should not matter."

My thoughts exactly. I do not use a numbering system for document revisions. Does it really matter if the document has been revised 1x or 20x - continuous improvmenet is never ending - small incremental steps.

Keep it simple, why add more complication to your procedures. DDC is a nightmare without adding more confusion.

My revision date is what identifies when the document was last updated. And since all procedures are now electronic we highlight all changes to the document. If more than 50% of the procedure changes then the revision date is highlighted.

 

[Marc]

A minimum requirement of your document control 'documentation' (that which defines the system, whether by flow chart or by text) is explaining how you control the documents which by default requires a definition of how you differentiate between versions. It may be by location (walking a thin line with such a system as you can get into the 'history' issue if you keep more than the last revision which most companies do - maybe a version or 2), by date, by number, by letter or whatever.

This is so basic that if it is not defined, how can you expect anyone to know if they are using the current revision or not?

As a rule, smaller companies will have less 'need' for numbering or letters than larger companies. Most of my clients of under 200 souls just use the date method.

-> Perhaps you should reach an agreement, defining how to
-> identify versions, and that write a quick work
-> instruction for reference?

Bingo!