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:Qualifications, illustration and certification From:Averil Strauss <averil -at- LEGENDCOMM -dot- COM> Date:Wed, 15 May 1996 17:31:15 -0400
>They've aquired this turf during the past decade. (Due in large part to the
>new publishing tools and the persistent pressures to produce more for less.)
>The decisions to use or not to use illustrations (regardless of the skills
>of the writer) depends on the writers DESIRE to use them. I know many
>writers who couldn't draw a pail of water from a well using a two handled
>bucket. Therefore, useful illustrations don't magically appear in their
>minds eye as they begin mentally designing their documents.
This is a problem in general. This is why only a few nuts like me ever
became fans of type-setting oriented word processors as opposed to WYSIWYG.
I find that not only can few people match colours accurately, but they
cannot translate a verbal description into an image mentally. Frankly, I
find it hard to avoid. This difference between people seems to me to be the
best argument for illustrations.
>The writers are in the drivers seat here. If the next maintenance manual you
>receive is 99% words and 1% graphics, you can bet it was produced by a
>writer without an illustration "mind-set", working with a small budget.
>All I'm asking is to keep an open mind. Consider for a moment that if the
>trend continues, we as technical communicators will have allowed external
>forces to creap in and dictate the content of our documents.
>The combination of quality writing, editing, document design, illustration
>and reproduction is the key to successful technical documentation. Is this
>not our common goal?
Certainly. Unfortunately, I personally know technical writers who stay
employed as TWs. They may be competent with a computer, but they cannot
spell reliably or use grammar correctly on any given page. Others are have
problems using the daily tools, such as computer programs. As a result, they
price their services lower or rely on charm, employers who don't speak
English, or other shifts. The result is low-quality manuals.
If you want to talk about certification, I think the primary requirements
1. A spelling test
2. A grammar test
3. Making a sketch (choice of tool and neatness optional) from a verbal
4. Taking a scribbled, disorganized list of mixed features and cautions,
etc. and creating an organized outline in classic form.
After that, you can ask about technical skills and adaptability.
FYI, I graduated in anthropology, minoring in geology, with a background in
acting and stage and costume design. I won prizes for creative writing in
high school and skipped all English courses in university. So, naturally, I
started writing software manuals for mainframe software, there being no such
thing as CPM or DOS.
Post Message: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
Get Commands: LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU with "help" in body.
Unsubscribe: LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU with "signoff TECHWR-L"
Listowner: ejray -at- ionet -dot- net