Re: "Two-track" documentation

Subject: Re: "Two-track" documentation
From: "Bonnie Granat" <bgranat -at- lynx -dot- dac -dot- neu -dot- edu>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 07:52:31 -0500


-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Plato <intrepid_es -at- yahoo -dot- com>
To: TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Cc: tmurrell -at- columbus -dot- rr -dot- com <tmurrell -at- columbus -dot- rr -dot- com>
Date: Monday, December 13, 1999 6:56 AM
Subject: Re: "Two-track" documentation


>Tom Murrell wrote:
>
>> if you don't take
>> the audience into account, you are no writer. Yes, you want to write
>> technically accurate information in a clear and concise manner, but if
you
>> aren't writing it TO someone, you are, at best, wasting your time,
because
>> no one will be reading it.

>
>If you think accuracy is not important in tech writing - please don't ever
take
>a job in the airline, food processing, nuclear weapons, or ... well, just
don't
>take a job. I really do not want to be at the mercy of documentation that
is
>well targeted to the right audience, but WRONG!
>


Tom Murrell did not say accuracy was not important in technical writing.
Your remarks could lead an innocent reader to assume that he did. You should
really be more careful.

Bonnie Granat








Previous by Author: Re: The writer who didn't work out
Next by Author: Re: MS Word questions.
Previous by Thread: Re: "Two-track" documentation
Next by Thread: RE: "Two-track" documentation


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads