Editors (was Slightly off topic...)

["Beth Brooks" <beth -dot- brooks -at- cox -dot- net>]

Yikes!

When I was in training to become a technical editor (on the job with a
mentor), I was taught that all editorial comments MUST be justifiable.
This meant I had to have either (1) a reference to a style guide or
grammar guide or dictionary or set of conventions or policy or existing
materials in the same manual/series/help system to back up my
corrections or (2) a darn good, logical, reason for suggesting a change
which I could articulate to the writer. The former were generally
non-negotiable, the latter always for discussion. When confused by
writing, I ask for clarification rather than "assume and correct". 

Over time, I've learned to temper rigid adherence to the rules with
realism; one must occasionally pick ones battles rather than insist on
perfection in the face of a looming deadline.

Guess I had best check my assumptions at the door before thinking that
all editors are taught this way.

Beth

Paraphrase, Inc.
Writing and Editing Services
Words That WORK For You!


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Purchase RoboHelp X3 in April and receive a $100 mail-in 
rebate, plus FREE RoboScreenCapture and WebHelp Merge Module.  
Order here: http://www.ehelp.com/products/robohelp/


   Help celebrate TECHWR-L's 10th Anniversary starting this month!
Check out the contests at http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/special/contests/
Happy birthday to you, happy birthday to you, happy birthday TECHWR-L....

---
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.