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: Editors From:Dianne Martin <MartinD -at- TRAVIS -dot- TYC -dot- STATE -dot- TX -dot- US> Date:Fri, 17 Jan 1997 14:22:00 PST
I have to agree with getting the editors involved early. In fact, I have
_never_ had a real editor to proof my stuff. However, I do enlist the help
of anyone at the company with an aptitude for the English language and I do
so on the first draft. Most of the time, this person has not seen the
product (I write software user docs) nor will that person have the luxury of
running the software while going through the first draft. If I can make the
manual understandable to the editor under those circumstances, I pray that
my users will be even more enlightened while actually seeing the software.
Of course, I do run the second, third & final drafts by the person to get
final changes. But time is always working against major revisions by that
time. If I don't get the problems ironed out early, they stay until the
next version is released (sigh!)
My frustration is in not knowing the
subject well enough to offer suggestions. It seems that, like my
students, some writers are reluctant to try to improve a document
that's already written because that's over. By the time I get it,
read it and approach them with comments, they're already onto another
one. I can understand their reluctance, it just is then more
difficult for me to do my job. That's why I'd, ideally, like to be