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.
My experience is
that paper manuals are perceived as low-tech (read __bad__) by high-tech
audiences. (For the past 10 years I've mostly written for high-techers,
so it's good to get other perspectives.)
My experience with Unix-based engineers and programmers is that _any_
documentation is bad. You are either supposed to know it already, figure
out from its cryptic name and -h options how it is used, or (as a last resort
only) read the online (text file) "man" pages. These "man" pages are written
for Unix "gurus" by Unix "gurus", and it is a sign of weakness and incompetence
to admit that you find them incomprehensible. Ain't Unix grand!
How does that quote go about reading the documentation is admitting failure?
Gwen (ggall -at- ca -dot- oracle -dot- com)
"Why can't somebody give us a list of things that everybody thinks and
nobody says, and another list of things that everybody says and nobody thinks."