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: Framemaker required From:Tim Altom <taltom -at- IQUEST -dot- NET> Date:Thu, 21 Mar 1996 18:40:00 EST
At 02:51 PM 3/21/96 -0800, you wrote:
>>I don't think techwriters are in a good tactical position to complain
>>about people from the print shop applying for techwriter positions,
>>especially after some of the notions my colleagues have put forward on
>>this very list, about "rules" for "type" "design".
Is there a problem with tech writers knowing good type and layout rules? In
today's workplace, we have to do everything that was formerly done by
separate professionals. That's regrettable, and it's led to masses of
unreadable offal, but it's nonetheless a fact of our lives. I don't think
it's unreasonable to expect a tech writer to be a writer first, foremost and
specially, and then expect a writer to know the basics of good layout.
We ease the transition here by having standard templates, or special
templates that we individually develop, and having writers use them during
the layout process. However, I see absolutely nothing wrong with acquiring
at least some of the fundamental guidelines. And there are such guidelines,
hammered out over a long period of time. Proportions, white space, and type
characteristics, among other things, are evident in art, graphic design,
CAD, and architecture, as well as in page layout.