Re: Technical Writing Defined At Last

Subject: Re: Technical Writing Defined At Last
From: Martha J Davidson <editrix -at- SLIP -dot- NET>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 13:39:43 -0800

At 01:47 PM 12/12/97 -0600, Erika Steffer wrote:
>Perhaps the definition of TW as "The art of communication between man,
>machine and animal" covered all writers and users 14 years ago. Today, it
>seems to cover only half.
>
So what's missing? What half does it cover, and what doesn't it cover?

I'll speculate a bit... is it that it doesn't include the logistics of
technical communication--the tools, methods, and techniques we use that are
so much more varied than 14 years ago? The down-and-dirty stuff we do
every day to make it possible? The technology we learn and use in the
process of creating so that we can keep up with the evolving standards and
expectations around us?

Or something else entirely?


--
Martha Jane {Kolman | Davidson}
editrix -at- slip -dot- net / mjk -at- synon -dot- com
Senior Technical Writer

"If I am not for myself, who will be for me?
If I am only for myself, what am I?
If not now, when?"
--Hillel, "Mishna, Sayings of the Fathers 1:13"

http://www.documentation.com/, or http://www.dejanews.com/



Previous by Author: Advice for Unix help files?
Next by Author: Re: Quality, Documentation, and Mental Blocks
Previous by Thread: Re: Technical Writing Defined At Last
Next by Thread: Re: Technical Writing Defined At Last


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads