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.
In article <9608048418 -dot- AA841859377 -at- sctepsc2 -dot- sct -dot- co -dot- uk>, Iain Harrison
<iharrison -at- sct -dot- co -dot- uk> writes:
|> Fred Rudder says:
|> If an architect devises a design for a building and calls that process
|> "designing", why isn't it valid for an engineer who devises or defines
|> architecture for a technical system to refer to that process as
|> I don't want to get into the rather pointless discussion about
|> but want to focus on what exactly we are naming: The task or the
|> If an architect designs a building and calls it designing, why isn't is
|> valid for an engineer why designs a system to call it designing?
|> If we start to define the function by the product, the architect isn't
|> designing, she is 'walling', 'roofing', or to take a more generic view,
|> is 'building'. (And yes, most of the architects I know are female.)
Then what is someone *really* doing when he or she is
"populating" a database? Hmm?
I'm sorry, that was self-indulgent. I'll go now.
Len O. EXISTENTIAL SODA:
saslpo -at- unx -dot- sas -dot- com Have young, drink fun, be Pepsi.
TECHWR-L List Information
To send a message about technical communication to 2500+ list readers,
E-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send administrative commands
ALL other questions or problems concerning the list
should go to the listowner, Eric Ray, at ejray -at- ionet -dot- net -dot-