Re: Writer vs Author (was Techwriting after the boom)

Subject: Re: Writer vs Author (was Techwriting after the boom)
From: "Bonnie Granat" <bgranat -at- editors-writers -dot- info>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 05:23:32 -0400



----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark L. Levinson" <mark_levinson -at- yahoo -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Sent: June 08, 2003 05:05 AM
Subject: Re: Writer vs Author (was Techwriting after the boom)


>
> Bonnie writes:
> > Technical writers are not technical authors.
>
> I thought that technical authors were the same
> as technical writers but in England.
>
> What's supposed to be the difference between
> a technical writer and a technical author?
> Are you considering that a technical writer
> is more like an editor? (And if so, where
> does that leave the technical editor?)
>
>

All of the technical occupational descriptions provided by government, by
private industry, and by the educational establishment state *primarily* that
technical writers *explain* technology or scientific concepts to a lay
audience. There is no occupational designation for technical author. I believe
that that term is now used to distinguish between technical writers and SMEs
who write books and articles. That leaves technical editors (like me, when I
wear that hat) in the clear. ;)

I consider a technical writer to be a writer who has training in rhetoric,
critical thinking, and communications. In addition, the technical writer has
an *interest* in technology of all kinds and a joy in learning about
technology and science. Common sense tells me that a technical writer who
hasn't a clue how a chip is made is not going to prance down to Intel and
expect to be hired to write manufacturing procedures. Common sense tells me
that a technical writer with no understanding of relational databases is going
to apply for a job documenting databases.

As I've said before, in other posts, there are no doubt certain technical
writing jobs that require a depth of understanding that is quite high. And
yes, the more you know, the better. But technical expertise is simply not a
requirement. The ability to write coherently *is* -- and as I've said, I find
bad thinking and bad writing to be the primary cause of bad documentation.

___________________________________
Bonnie Granat
Granat Editorial Services
http://www.editors-writers.info






^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Robohelp X3, from eHelp, lets you quickly and easily create
professional Help systems for all your Windows and Web-based
applications, including Net.

Order RoboHelp X3 in May and receive a $100 mail-in rebate, PLUS
free RoboScreenCapture and WebHelp Merge Module.

Order RoboHelp today: http://www.ehelp.com/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.



References:
Re: Writer vs Author (was Techwriting after the boom): From: Mark L. Levinson

Previous by Author: Re: Techwriting after the boom
Next by Author: Re: Writer vs Author (was Techwriting after the boom)
Previous by Thread: Re: Writer vs Author (was Techwriting after the boom)
Next by Thread: Re: Writer vs Author (was Techwriting after the boom)


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


Sponsored Ads