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.
I'm currently writing a book on information design, and encountering
two problems I need some help to resolve. Since the problems likely
face many techwhirlers, I thought it might be appropriate to post them
1. I frequently refer to those who use the information we design in
our various roles as information designers. Where the context permits,
I say "the audience" (when discussing a collective target audience),
"the reader(s)" (for text that will be read rather than looked at) or
"the viewer(s)" (for visuals, including text treated as a graphic
image), but sometimes I end up resorting simply to "the user(s)". I
don't like that word, and the more obvious workarounds ("those who use
the information", "the readers, the viewers or both", etc.) are long
and equally unsatisfying. "Clients" doesn't work for me either,
despite the validity of an implied contract between author/designer
2. I'm closing in on an estimated 1000 published pages (letter-sized)
as I approach the end of my first draft (i.e., after expansion to
include white space and illustrations). Ouch! I want to cover as many
topics as possible, so eliminating topics won't work. I'm working hard
to chop the copy as I write and revise (e.g., no passive voice,
simplified constructions, substituting single words for groups of
words, etc. etc.). Nonetheless, the text won't come down to a more
manageable size... which is both good (I'm achieving my goal of broad
coverage) and bad (trimming too much makes the coverage superficial).
Books that big are intimidating, hard to read or consult, and fall
apart when the spine breaks. I've considered publishing it as two
volumes, but that's an awkward solution for the publisher, the
librarian and the reader. Part of the book (about 1/4) will be a
discussion of specifics (e.g., design for online information), perhaps
for use as a workbook in a course on information design, so perhaps
this could form the second volume... I've had a few texts that worked
this way, and the approach worked for me as reader.
Thanks in advance for your help.
--Geoff Hart geoff-h -at- mtl -dot- feric -dot- ca
("Who shall edit the editors?")