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: PageMaker? what to do From:Michael Keith Anderson <mka -at- IX -dot- NETCOM -dot- COM> Date:Sat, 4 Nov 1995 21:30:00 -0600
Kris:
I convinced my first tech writing employer I could to the work better =
and cleaner because I knew how to layout the pages in addition to =
writing well. It may be good or bad, I don't know, but it's coming down =
to the marriage of writing and design. Employers want it - a lot of tech =
writers deliver it. The tools are too accessible.=20
When I create documents, I always consider how my words will appear on =
the final presentation. Actually, I can't help but think about that =
(sometimes I do it to a fault). However, because I can do it, and I know =
how my words will best appear, it's something I do.
It wasn't too terribly long ago I was cranking out documents on Word =
Star using a CP/M machine wishing there was some way to get better copy =
from my dot matrix printer. Then Fancy Font came along.....
----------
From: Kris Olberg[SMTP:KJOlberg -at- AOL -dot- COM]
Sent: Friday, November 03, 1995 10:12 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list TECHWR-L
Subject: Re: PageMaker? what to do
You're right about a good client paying on time, and they do have the =
right
to say what program you use. My post was short and pointed because I get
irritated when our profession is reduced to page layout, design, and =
desktop
publishing. I am a writer, not a desktop publisher. I think it's bad for =
our
profession to focus so deeply on DTP. Witness the following numbers, =
which
reflect how many posts I have saved on several TECHWR-L topics:
112 posts on tools and graphics issues
35 posts on copyrights/trademarks
22 posts on Web issues (long v. short, etc.)
17 on word, verb, and pronoun usage
11 on indexing issues
6 on optimal document size
etc.
Do these numbers accurately reflect that writers spend too much time =
focusing
on DTP issues and not enough on the writing? I think so.
I suppose the issue is that many clients don't have the resources to =
supply a
desktop publishing resource to supplement the process. They could be
educated. We need to continue to educate them. And when a cost/benefit
analysis shows (which will not be the case for all clients) the cost =
savings
rendered by allowing the writer to focusing on the writing, not the DTP, =
the
writer should be allowed to use software of choice.
