Re: What do you guys think of STCs new definition for technicalwriter?

Subject: Re: What do you guys think of STCs new definition for technicalwriter?
From: Ned Bedinger <doc -at- edwordsmith -dot- com>
To: Edwin Skau <eddy -dot- skau -at- gmail -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 11:45:12 -0700

Edwin Skau wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 7:05 PM, Bonnie Granat <bgranat -at- granatedit -dot- com>
> wrote:
>
>>> Why is a word or phrase detestable? Is it because of the
>>> spelling, the sound, or what it seems to define? What then in
>>> that person's opinion does it seem to define, and what does
>>> that person find detestable about that?
>>>
>>
>> That was me, Edwin, and I was not 100% serious. ; )
>>
>> "Knowledge product" does have the same twang (to me) that "business
>> solution" has. It's a term that really doesn't say anything, and the reader
>> has to find out more. Book, online tutorial, instructional video, on the
>> other hand, convey real information. Another one is "information worker,"
>> two words taking up space in the universe and conveying absolutely no
>> meaning.
>>
>>
>> Dear Bonnie,
>
> I hear what you're saying and concur completely. Since we're using "
> technology goods" in the definition, I assumed that using another similar
> term would help shorten the definition.

I confess to being not buffalo'd by the term "knowledge product." And
considering that technical writers are often responsible for
"synthesizing" information (according to numerous job descriptions I've
seen) I think it's a little bit disengenuous to claim it doesn't make
any sense.

But I agree with Bonnie, the 'twanggg' of it has a synthetic quality,
like something made up by someone not familiar with books etc.

To me, that's the rub with the entire effort to name us (and then define
us as) 'technical communicator', but down deep, I know there's nothing
wrong with changing a name or assuming an alias. Heck, married women and
outlaws do it all the time, right?

--Ned
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList

True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com

---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/archive%40web.techwr-l.com


To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.


Follow-Ups:

References:
Re: What do you guys think of STCs new definition for technicalwriter?: From: Edwin Skau
Re: What do you guys think of STCs new definition for technicalwriter?: From: Edwin Skau
RE: What do you guys think of STCs new definition for technicalwriter?: From: Bonnie Granat
Re: What do you guys think of STCs new definition for technicalwriter?: From: Edwin Skau

Previous by Author: Re: moving into xml-based writing
Next by Author: Re: You VS One
Previous by Thread: Re: What do you guys think of STCs new definition for technicalwriter?
Next by Thread: Re: What do you guys think of STCs new definition for technicalwriter?


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


Sponsored Ads