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: acceptable error rates From:Steven Jong <SteveJong -at- AOL -dot- COM> Date:Mon, 28 Oct 1996 10:41:06 -0500
In the discussion of typographical errors, many posters have gone straight
for the dichotomy of 'would you rather have a good communicator who mistypes
or a bad communicator who does not?' Of course, I would prefer the former;
but that is simply a statement that of all the elements of technical
communication, typographical accuracy is not the most important. If you're
being measured *only* on your typing and editing skills, as was the
unfortunate poster whose job description matched that of a secretary, then
your company is messed up. This leads to the more interesting question of
what really *is* important to technical communication (which I think should
be measurable), which is beyond the scope of this thread but which might make
a fascinating TECHWR-L Delphi study.
By the way, why do I have to make your choice? It is just as common to have
the choice of a good communicator whose attention to detail extends down to
minimizing typos, for whom the lack of flaws is a source of pride, and a bad
communicator who doesn't care to get things right, for whom typos are only a
symptom of a more serious problem.
Steven Jong, Documentation Group Leader ("Typo? What tpyo?")
Lightbridge, Inc, 281 Winter St., Waltham, MA 02154 USA
<jong -at- lightbridge -dot- com>, 617.672.4902 [voice], 617.890.2681 [FAX]