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 agree with you, but when a document is 1000 pages and is being reviewed
by 15 people it becomes difficult for me to explain to my kids how
important the environment is to us.
From: TECHWR-L[SMTP:TECHWR-L -at- VM1 -dot- ucc -dot- okstate -dot- edu]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 1995 3:22 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list TECHWR-L
Subject: Re: Electronic Review
Tom Kolano wrote:
> Clearly, there are advantages to eliminating paper in such a
> However, in grad school we were made aware of studies
> which demonstrated that electronic copy was much more straining
> and tiring to read than hard copy. Unfortunately, I do not
> remember the authors of these studies, but I agree with
> the conclusion from my own experience. Isn't this still an
> accepted tenet? I prefer reading paper copy, and would
> probably insist on the same as the reviewers above.
I prefer to edit and review documents on paper rather than on the
It's easier to read paper documents (more dpi than on the monitor).
reviewing doesn't allow me to flip back and forth between pages to
paragraphs. When I review paper documents, I move away from the computer,
back in the chair, and rest my feet on an opened bottom drawer of my
like to believe that this change of position is helping me avoid