Re: Editing .pdfs - Continued

Subject: Re: Editing .pdfs - Continued
From: Peter Neilson <neilson -at- alltel -dot- net>
To: TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 16:05:47 -0500

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 14:05:52 -0600, HSC Italian <twins398 -at- hotmail -dot- com> wrote:

Another question in conjunction with my initial posting: Our new
editor is taking on many other responsibilities that I am used to
doing as the writer. For example, the editor gets the "final" .pdf
and fixes all the link boxes that are not extended out as far as
they should be or are not thick enough. Again, my experience has
been that that is the writer's job. The editor's job is to focus
Primarily on the content of the document and make sure writers are
adhering to the style guide, period!

A good editor should address content, grammar and style. In all my
years writing I've met only one superb editor. She would recommend
moving sentences around, or choosing more appropriate words, and
she was nearly always right! Yes, she did the usual "which" hunts
and comma removal, but her focus was on crystal-clear presentation
of the ideas. And this was stuff like Unix kernel documentation,
standards for distributed system management, etc. She knew when
technical jargon was appropriate and when to question the undefined
hapex legomenon.

She didn't bother with typography stuff at all, perhaps because all
her time was taken up improving the (already very good) material
from the tech writers.

Do others have suggestions on how to help editors rise to higher
standards without insulting them?

Editing .pdfs - Continued: From: HSC Italian

Previous by Author: Re: Editing .pdfs - to do or not to do is the question
Next by Author: Re: Queries on Single Sourcing
Previous by Thread: Editing .pdfs - Continued
Next by Thread: Re: Editing .pdfs - Continued

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

Sponsored Ads