Re: Tech *writer* vs *tech* writer

Subject: Re: Tech *writer* vs *tech* writer
From: Herman Holtz <holtz -at- PALTECH -dot- COM>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 08:35:24 UNDEFINED

In article <2 -dot- 2 -dot- 32 -dot- 19960109003556 -dot- 007311b4 -at- 140 -dot- 174 -dot- 185 -dot- 100> Richard Mateosian
<srm -at- c2 -dot- org> writes:
>From: Richard Mateosian <srm -at- c2 -dot- org>
>Subject: Tech *writer* vs *tech* writer
>Date: 9 Jan 1996 20:41:08 -0600

>>A good technical writer communicates technically complex information using
>>terminology and style appropriate for the target audience. That is the
>>essence of the profession.

>Sometimes writers who are technically savvy have a hard time understanding
>naive users, but so do technically naive writers. The solution to that is
>usability testing.

During the boom years of defense and space contracts, most tech writing
revolved around operating and maintenance manuals for hardware, and the
geenrally accepted solution was to hire people witch technical knowledge and
skills and train them as writers, with support by editors, who might or might
not also have some technical background. A large percentage of the tech
writers of that time were young men who were trained in the military, largely
from the Air Force. For the most part, however, we were writing to military
specs for manuals, which were pretty well detailed.

Herman Holtz [holtz -at- paltech -dot- com] -dot- Custom services for all
writing needs, including ghost writing, copywriting, proposals,
manuals, brochures, other. Write, call for free estimates,
discussions of your need and my recommendations at no charge.
PO Box 1731, Wheaton, MD 20915; 301-649-2499; FAX 301-649-5745.


Previous by Author: Counting noses
Next by Author: Counting Noses
Previous by Thread: Tech *writer* vs *tech* writer
Next by Thread: FW: Email address


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads