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:Editorial and technical reviews From:bmaaks -at- TELLABS -dot- COM Date:Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:41:03 CST
Sue Heim received many good responses to her dilemma. I'm not sure what
type of the "technical stuff" is included in the "left field or right
field, or [being] right on base?" I'm guessing that it is the mechanics
of the online help, a sort of template, that will be used for all pages.
I have another suggestion. I may be way off base with what is possible in
Sue's situation, but I have found it can be effective to provide reviewers
with only the materials I want them to review. Sometimes I ask reviewers to
look at only one aspect of a document. I think this is especially handy
with online documents, where I want a usability review to check the links
between the page/topic and the link location, and check the format of the page.
Is it possible for you to create a "template" that generalizes the
content so it is not part of the review--like making placeholder pages,
maybe limiting the content/text to the title of the procedure or topic that
the page will describe?
I have found that reviewers (I work with LOTS of engineers) will edit for
typos, misspellings and any other kind of error, whether or not you ask for it.
I try to be gracious and accept their input. They are part of my audience,
and I am writing for them. The end-users of my documents may not be so
kind and forgiving of these errors, right?