RE: a different resume red flag

Subject: RE: a different resume red flag
From: "Goldstein, Dan" <DGoldstein -at- DeusTech -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 09:09:18 -0400

Hacked formatting has nothing to do with "corporate/contractual standards."
Tech writers generally use style-based formatting, regardless of company
standards or specific tools (Word, Frame, HTML, XML, etc.). There are
exceptions, but consistent manual formatting wastes time and causes trouble
for others working with the same document. What does that say about the job

And as for Word-generated HTML... that code's so ugly, it makes little
children cry.

-- Dan Goldstein

> -----Original Message-----
> From: bcliver
> Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 5:11 PM
> Cc: bounce-techwr-l-131985 -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com; TECHWR-L
> Subject: Re: a different resume red flag
> >A different red flag: incorrect use of doc tools. If you
> >are applying
> >for a tech-writing position and send me a URL (resume or
> >samples), I'm
> >going to inspect your HTML. If you send me a Word document
> >and we use
> >Word (not currently the case so I don't care as much), I'm going to
> >inspect your use of formatting elements. If I see that you
> >hacked the
> >formatting in some way, or claimed HTML proficiency but used Word to
> >produce your web page, or supplied a web page that only works in one
> >browser, I'm much more likely to send your resume to the bit bucket
> >instead of the interview pile.
> ...Why is that incorrect use of doc tools? The purpose of the Word doc was

> probably to provide you with an example of the candidate's writing style,
> unity, coherence, grammar, and so on. In most cases, templates and formats

> are forced upon writers as corporate/contractual standards. You may not
> like it during your "inspection", but the candidate probably does not have

> a choice. Conveying complex material is the core of our profession, not
> playing with formatting tools.


ROBOHELP X5: Featuring Word 2003 support, Content Management, Multi-Author
support, PDF and XML support and much more!

WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT: New! Document review system for Word and FrameMaker
authors. Automatic browser-based drafts with unlimited reviewers. Full
online discussions -- no Web server needed!

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


Previous by Author: RE: a different resume red flag
Next by Author: RE: a different resume red flag
Previous by Thread: RE: a different resume red flag
Next by Thread: Re: a different resume red flag

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

Sponsored Ads