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: Do editors need to be techies? From:Michelle Nichols/VENTANA <Michelle_Nichols/VENTANA -dot- ITP -at- LGATE -dot- VMEDIA -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 21 Jan 1997 08:15:24 EDT
I think Robert makes a very good point. It all depends on the "type" of
editing needed. If you have the title of "technical editor" then I think you
should definitely have technical knowledge related to what you are being asked
to edit. However, other types of editors may not need this technical
For example, I am a "development editor" in the computer book publishing
industry. I have to be familiar enough with the technology the book is about
to understand the audience and market for the book, but I certainly don't have
to be an expert in using the actual technology. I have improved the content
and organization of several books with a working knowledge of the technology.
However, if I were to be a "technical editor" then I think the scope of my
editing would change greatly. I would have to be much more of an expert and
provide much more direction towards the actual technical content of the book.
In the computer book publishing industry, we have a "technical reviewer" go
behind us to check the technical accuracy of the material, sort of like a "beta
tester." (Then, finally, a copy-editor goes behind the technical reviewer.)
So, to answer the question "Do editors need to be techies?" it is the
ever-famous response: "It depends."