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.
And, yes, the process is sort of scientific, until you toss in the
variables, deadlines, resources, flaky software, and judgement of
document (online and printed) design . . ..
I'd say, there's an art, if not a craft, to the science of technical
writing. If you disagree, try writing a 600-page software manual, using
section numbers, lots of numbered lists, TOC, IX, in MS Word, and then
port it to online help via RoboHelp . . . you'll see that craftiness and
workarounds and intelligent application of your skills become a
necessity.
-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Levy [mailto:PLevy -at- epion -dot- com]
This makes no sense:
"You can be documenting how a toaster works, or
you can be polarizing atoms in a vacuum... wild cards
abound. "
The technology in the two products you mention differs, but the
"mechanics
behind the process" of documenting these products can be exactly the
same. I
would think that you, a scientific tech writer, would agree.
-----Original Message-----
From: Goober [mailto:techcommgoober -at- yahoo -dot- com]
--- Phil Levy <PLevy -at- epion -dot- com> wrote:
> >the vast differences from company to company and
> >workflow to workflow.
>
> This may be another topic altogether, but these
> differences are usually
> neither vast nor valid. This is the main reason that
> tech writing is still a
> craft and not an engineering discipline.
Ooohhh... A tantilizingly tasty tidbit for fun Friday
frolicking. *lol*
Anyway, no matter what you do, there are wild cards at
play. You can be documenting how a toaster works, or
you can be polarizing atoms in a vacuum... wild cards
abound. It's the nature of the world.
<snip>
Well, I see what I do as science. Why? Because I have
a process. If it were craft, I'd be King Workaround,
Lord of the Makeshifts. *lol* All IMO, of course. But
I stick to a tried and true method of writing
documentation, one that's taken me years to perfect.
It's basically common sense wrapped into a workflow,
but if I marketed it I'd have to call it something
other than Information Mapping. *lol*
Anyway, HOW you approach a documentation task can be
applied to multiple projects, but the mechanics behind
the process (not grammar mechanics) are bound to
change.
<snip>structure because they can
afford to do so.
Thoughts on any of this?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Check out RoboDemo for tutorials! It makes creating full-motion software
demonstrations and other onscreen support materials easy and intuitive.
Need RoboHelp? Save $100 on RoboHelp Office in May with our mail-in rebate.
Go to http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l
Your monthly sponsorship message here reaches more than
5000 technical writers, providing 2,500,000+ monthly impressions.
Contact Eric (ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com) for details and availability.
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
