Re: Calling all Technical Editors again!; Was, "RE: Writing Corrective Actions for customers?"

Subject: Re: Calling all Technical Editors again!; Was, "RE: Writing Corrective Actions for customers?"
From: Ned Bedinger <doc -at- edwordsmith -dot- com>
To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 23:48:55 -0700

Beth Agnew wrote:
> I think that's a faulty assumption. As technical writers we know how to
> quickly get up to speed on an area of content in which we do not have
> specialized knowledge, and shape that content into something useful for
> the audience. We are communications experts, not necessarily trained
> experts in aerospace or any other discipline when we get started, but
> we're people who can learn rapidly, understand deeply, empathize with
> the user sufficiently to know what they need and how to say it, and
> produce workable solutions to information problems.
>
> The turnaround time is not anywhere near what it would take an expert in
> the subject matter to learn how to communicate. If the "experts" were so
> good at doing so, we wouldn't have a profession in the first place. The
> plain truth is that they are not. Do we so quickly forget the unreadable
> and unusable computer documentation written by the computer experts?
> Your BIOS example proves that case. Dollars to doughnuts that
> information that was so unhelpful was written by the computer expert and
> not a skilled technical writer. I don't need to take a 4-year
> engineering degree to be able to write about bearings, I only need to
> determine the information needs of my audience, find where that
> information resides, and bridge the two. Our skills are in
> communications and information processing; we can apply that to any
> industry.

I do believe you're describing a textbook case of technical
communication as an answer in search of a question. I don't really
expect projects to work that way most of the time, but if you do, I'm
not going to argue. Not now anyway.

Mike's buying down at The Archive, are you coming? :-)

Cheers



> It's an age-old debate that gluts the techwr-l archives, and I doubt
> we'll ever get resolution. We're not saying the writer has no knowledge
> at all, we're saying that technical writers have skills that enable them
> to acquire a sufficient amount of subject knowledge in a short period of
> time to get the job done. We are adept learners, most of us self-taught
> in many subject areas, and we gain whatever knowledge we need, when we
> need it. We are indeed experts, but experts in communication.
> --Beth
>
> Ned Bedinger wrote:
>> Suppose a User says, "Writer, I need cross-reference tables so I can
>> find and source Korean replacement roller bearings when the OEM
>> German-made bearings wear out."
>>
>> If the author had those tables already available, fine, no need to know
>> any more about it. The work could be done by the mailroom clerk or the
>> holder of the patents form roller bearings, and it wouldn't matter.
>>
>> But if the author had to start from scratch learming what roller
>> bearings are, what types are made in Germany, what Korean ane German
>> manufacturers to contact for specifications, and how to compare Korean
>> and German rating systems, and whre to look for thi9s sort of
>> information, then the turnaround time on the user's request would leap
>> from a day to an impractically long time. Wouldn't it?
>>
>> That is the assumption I'm making about why the writer needs the knowledge.
>> <snip>
>>
>> For example, when I boot my PC and hit <Del> to set up BIOS parameter
>> values, I need to know what those parameters are about. I look in the
>> online BIOS help, but it is pathically uninformative. I look in the
>> motherboard documentation, and it says exactly what the online help
>> says. I trace the BIOS back to the manufacturer, who looks it up, points
>> me to a web site where I can read the specification. I need a monster
>> amount of knowledge to get what I need from the spec. It is very technical.
>>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
> printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
> Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
> http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
>
> True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
> Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
> documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as doc -at- edwordsmith -dot- com -dot-
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/doc%40edwordsmith.com
>
>
> To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
> Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
> http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>
>
>

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList

True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com

---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/archive%40web.techwr-l.com


To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.


References:
Re: Calling all Technical Editors again!; Was, "RE: Writing Corrective Actions for customers?": From: Michael West
Re: Calling all Technical Editors again!; Was, "RE: Writing Corrective Actions for customers?": From: Ned Bedinger
Re: Calling all Technical Editors again!; Was, "RE: Writing Corrective Actions for customers?": From: Beth Agnew

Previous by Author: Re: Apologies
Next by Author: Re: Calling all Technical Editors again!; Was, "RE: Writing Corrective Actions for customers?"
Previous by Thread: Re: Calling all Technical Editors again!; Was, "RE: Writing Corrective Actions for customers?"
Next by Thread: Re: Calling all Technical Editors again!; Was, "RE: Writing Corrective Actions for customers?"


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


Sponsored Ads