RE: Feedback [LONG]

Subject: RE: Feedback [LONG]
From: Sean Hower <hokumhome -at- freehomepage -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 07:27:16 -0700 (PDT)

John P. asks:
Is it better to include substantial content that's mostly right and mostly useful but unreviewed, or is it better to include substantially less content that is known to be 100% right?

In general, I'd have to go along with the less content-more accuracy angle. However, in this case, I think your approach is fine, and probably just about the only thing you can do. I mean, your client is the HQ CTO, not the techies with a bad attitude. (And while I say that, I'm not implying that John should go about stepping on toes just because the techies aren't his client). I've been in a similar situation, but I didn't have the support of the people that hired us.

"And in the morning, I'm makin waffles." ~ Donkey
Sean Hower - tech writer

Create your own web site for FREE at


sourcing tool for FrameMaker that lets you easily publish your content
online. No macro language required!

Mercer University's online MS Program in Technical Communication Management:
Preparing leaders of tomorrow's technical communication organizations today.
See or write George Hayhoe at hayhoe_g -at- mercer -dot- edu -dot-

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Previous by Author: RE: Nielsen and PDFs
Next by Author: Re: CSS book recommendations?
Previous by Thread: RE: Feedback [LONG]
Next by Thread: RE: Nielsen and PDFs

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads