Re: acceptable error rates

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.

-- Steve

============================================================
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]


Previous by Author: Re: acceptable error rates
Next by Author: asterisks in Frame, 'framers' listserv
Previous by Thread: Re: acceptable error rates
Next by Thread: Re: acceptable error rates


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads