TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
>>Personaly, I've never found "audience awareness" to be useful.
>Audience *defines* clear and concise writing. What is necessary
>background for an undergrad is maddeningly superflous for a PhD.
I'm in partial agreement. But the content (what you wrote) changed
between audiences, not the format (how you wrote). RoMay's post read:
>I constantly stress the importance of choosing vocabulary, content
>level, visuals, even type size, which best fit the needs of the
IMHO, each of these items fall into the category of deciding HOW to
write, not WHAT to write. If you read my original post, I added that:
>I do make certain assumptions, but they impact WHAT I'm explaining
>rather than HOW I explain it.
It's possible that I'm separating "content level" from "vocabulary" and
"visuals, even type size". But is "content level" driven by the topic
or the audience? My own experience (a database of 1!) is that I am a
o The more I understand THE TOPIC - not the audience. I listen to
audience feedback so I can understand what TOPIC the audience needs.
Ada compilers are not hot sellers these days - so alas, my audience
o The more I learn how to explain TOPICS, regardless of the audience.
I'm not a comedian. I'm a Technical Writer. I MUST understand
the topic before I can open my mouth (intelligibly ;-) ).
David (The Man) Blyth
Alsys (San Diego)
dsb -at- alsys -dot- com
Blodo Poa Maximus