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.
Subject:Re: Grammar & reviews From:Bev Parks <bparks -at- HUACHUCA-EMH1 -dot- ARMY -dot- MIL> Date:Sun, 29 Jan 1995 17:03:09 MST
My 2 cents on this subject:
I'm human and thus prone to human error and oversight.
However, I write something the best way I can in the time I
have, even if it's "only a draft." Okay, maybe I suffer from a
bit of perfectionism. Whether a document says "DRAFT" on it or
not, people are going to make judgments based on its appearance.
And if they've just received that document from me, than they
are judging me. Who knows, someday I may be looking for a job and
these people (whoever they are) may be doing the hiring.
bparks -at- huachuca-emh1 -dot- army -dot- mil
> From: Richard Mateosian <srm -at- C2 -dot- ORG>; Subject: Grammar & reviews
> I've been skipping over the postings in this area, but a snivet here, a
> snivet there, and pretty soon I was hooked.
> Does anyone believe that grammar and style are last-minute add-ons, like the
> documentation for some notorious software products?
> We can all benefit from careful editing. Most of us are not perfect. But
> don't you write grammatically as a matter of course, even in your drafts?
> Have you so little pride in your work that you'd circulate something
> sloppily written for review? What would you think of a software engineer who
> gave you code that wouldn't compile and had obviously never been tested?