Re: Knowing prog. lang. +s to a TW's $?

Subject: Re: Knowing prog. lang. +s to a TW's $?
From: Esther Wheeler <esther -at- AZURE-TECH -dot- COM>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 13:24:02 -0500

Cynthia Libby <cynthia -at- trump -dot- itg -dot- ti -dot- com> wrote:

>I am amazed when I hear writers say they wrote documentation for an
>application and have never used the application...

And Barb Philbrick responded:
>Please say it ain't so! ...
>Do many of you write documents without using the equipment or

I think (hope?) this happens less often than it used to. In my hardware
writing days I sometimes turned out hardware manuals for a relabeled
of equipment from the original documentation, without ever seeing the
equipment itself. At that same company, I distinctly remember arguing
long and hard that I needed to have admin priviledges on the system if
I was going to write the System Administration Guide. I won that one.

It certainly isn't the case now, though I could wish we had a longer
cycle for the docs after development finishes an upgrade.

Back to the original topic of this thread, I'm interested to hear that
people find
that a knowledge of programming languages is more of a hiring litmus test
a real job requirement. Just as I always suspected!

- Esther

Esther Wheeler (esther -at- azure-tech -dot- com)
GN Nettest / Azure Operation

TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
Search the archives at or search and
browse the archives at

Previous by Author: ADMIN: Posting Guidelines
Next by Author: Wage standards
Previous by Thread: Re: Knowing prog. lang. +s to a TW's $?
Next by Thread: Knowing prog. lang. +s to a TW's $?

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

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads