Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field

[john rosberg <john_rosberg -at- hotmail -dot- com>]

Well, we've certainly ridden this pony into the ground, haven't we?

 

Given all the good responses to the OP's question, it seems to me that we may have adequately covered the topic, lacking further insight (?) from said OP.

 

It has occured to me (not for for the first time) that term limits may not be a good idea only for eleccted officials, but for email threads, as well.

 

Tongue mostly in cheek ;-} 
 
 
John Rosberg
Documentation and Training
john_rosberg -at- hotmail -dot- com
2765 Deerfield Road
Riverwoods, IL 60015
847-502-1833



 
> From: techwr-l-request -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> Subject: TECHWR-L Digest, Vol 46, Issue 4
> To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 00:00:05 -0600
> 
> Send TECHWR-L mailing list submissions to
> techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> techwr-l-request -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> techwr-l-owner -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of TECHWR-L digest..."
> 
> 
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> Free Software Documentation Project Web Cast: Covers developing Table of
> Contents, Context IDs, and Index, as well as Doc-To-Help 
> 2009 tips, tricks, and best practices.
> http://www.doctohelp.com/SuperPages/Webcasts/
> 
> Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for individual
> authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface. Write
> once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and version control!
> http://www.helpandmanual.com 
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
> 1. Re: Absence of FrameMaker from your skill set -- what does it
> say? (Stuart Burnfield)
> 2. Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> (john rosberg)
> 3. Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> (Elaine Garnet)
> 4. Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> (Peter Neilson)
> 5. Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> (Elaine Garnet)
> 6. RE: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> (Kat Kuvinka)
> 7. Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> (Gene Kim-Eng)
> 8. RE: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> (Combs, Richard)
> 9. RE: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> (Combs, Richard)
> 10. Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> (Gene Kim-Eng)
> 11. RE: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> (Kat Kuvinka)
> 12. Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> (Gene Kim-Eng)
> 13. Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> (Keith Hood)
> 14. Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> (voxwoman)
> 15. RE: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> (Kat Kuvinka)
> 16. Re: Is recession proof? Instructional Technologists/Technical
> Writers (Robert Lauriston)
> 17. Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> (Gene Kim-Eng)
> 18. Re: To continue OFF-TOPIC topics... (Bill Swallow)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 19:29:15 +0800 (WST)
> From: Stuart Burnfield <slb -at- westnet -dot- com -dot- au>
> Subject: Re: Absence of FrameMaker from your skill set -- what does it
> say?
> To: Techwr-l <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
> Message-ID:
> <2114332491 -dot- 6099261249298955583 -dot- JavaMail -dot- root -at- zim-store03 -dot- web -dot- westnet -dot- com -dot- au>
> 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> 
> All I'd add to what's already been said is that you should consider the range of skills your group has now compared with what you expect to need in, say, 1-2 years. 
> 
> > I'm one of the writers and I use Frame, two others use Word, 
> > and a fourth uses RoboHelp... 
> > There's a strong sentiment among some of our managers 
> > in favor of standardizing on Frame. 
> 
> Then it sounds like much of the future work will be done in Frame, though Word or RH will still be the right tool for some jobs. Your company already has some Frame skills (yours), so that's an acceptable starting point, but more would certainly be better. If you're the only expert, expect to spend a lot of your time on the three Ts (templates, training and troubleshooting). 
> 
> With another experienced Frame user on board you could share the load. No doubt the two of you will be familiar with different techniques and different parts of the product. You'll learn from each other and be better teachers to the others. 
> 
> However, I'd much rather work with someone good than someone who has the right badges but who looks like they could be a burden. 
> 
> List Frame skills as a plus but also list other skills that you need more of. Pick the best writer who can also enrich your group. 
> 
> Stuart 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 07:25:10 -0500
> From: john rosberg <john_rosberg -at- hotmail -dot- com>
> Subject: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
> Message-ID: <BLU114-W137A1BB67DFBCDBE87C1A7EF0F0 -at- phx -dot- gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> 
> 
> Tech Writer of the Beast wrote . . . . 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > I would like to obtain some good statistics on the following:
> > 
> > Average age?of employed technical writers at large corporations.
> > Length of time technical writers commonly stay in the field.
> > Average age of new hires at large corporations and whether it has changed since 2000.
> > Wage declines (or increases) for technical writers at large corporations over, say, the last decade or perhaps since 2000.
> > Decrease in numbers of technical writers at large corporations since 2000.
> > Outsourcing of technical writing positions since 2000, including information about the countries to which the jobs are outsourced.
> > Anyone know what is the best bet for reliable information on such things?
> > ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I suspect you may receive a little more data if you gave some idea about the use to which you wil to put this information, and who you are.
> 
> 
> John Rosberg
> Documentation and Training
> john_rosberg -at- hotmail -dot- com
> 2765 Deerfield Road
> Riverwoods, IL 60015
> 847-502-1833
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your vacation photos on your phone!
> http://windowsliveformobile.com/en-us/photos/default.aspx?&OCID=0809TL-HM
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 09:01:35 -0400
> From: Elaine Garnet <2egarnet -at- rogers -dot- com>
> Subject: Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> To: john rosberg <john_rosberg -at- hotmail -dot- com>
> Cc: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> Message-ID: <F029611F-50BB-47C3-8254-873B46B87570 -at- rogers -dot- com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
> 
> I wouldn't mind knowing either. It might confirm some of the things I 
> already suspect.
> 
> 
> On 3-Aug-09, at 8:25 AM, john rosberg wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > Tech Writer of the Beast wrote . . . .
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> I would like to obtain some good statistics on the following:
> >>
> >> Average age?of employed technical writers at large corporations.
> >> Length of time technical writers commonly stay in the field.
> >> Average age of new hires at large corporations and whether it has 
> >> changed since 2000.
> >> Wage declines (or increases) for technical writers at large 
> >> corporations over, say, the last decade or perhaps since 2000.
> >> Decrease in numbers of technical writers at large corporations 
> >> since 2000.
> >> Outsourcing of technical writing positions since 2000, including 
> >> information about the countries to which the jobs are outsourced.
> >> Anyone know what is the best bet for reliable information on such 
> >> things?
> >> ?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I suspect you may receive a little more data if you gave some idea 
> > about the use to which you wil to put this information, and who you 
> > are.
> >
> >
> > John Rosberg
> > Documentation and Training
> > john_rosberg -at- hotmail -dot- com
> > 2765 Deerfield Road
> > Riverwoods, IL 60015
> > 847-502-1833
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Get your vacation photos on your phone!
> > http://windowsliveformobile.com/en-us/photos/default.aspx?&OCID=0809TL-HM
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > Free Software Documentation Project Web Cast: Covers developing 
> > Table of
> > Contents, Context IDs, and Index, as well as Doc-To-Help
> > 2009 tips, tricks, and best practices.
> > http://www.doctohelp.com/SuperPages/Webcasts/
> >
> > Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for individual
> > authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface. Write
> > once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and version 
> > control! http://www.helpandmanual.com/
> >
> > ---
> > You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as 2egarnet -at- rogers -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/2egarnet%40rogers.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.
> >
> > Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:
> > http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l-chat
> >
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 09:30:46 -0400
> From: Peter Neilson <neilson -at- windstream -dot- net>
> Subject: Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> Message-ID: <4A76E686 -dot- 1070102 -at- windstream -dot- net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> 
> In my jaundiced opinion almost none of those parameters are useful for 
> anything that can or should be done, with the possible exception of 
> granting a PhD in a subject that I would prefer to avoid studying.
> 
> What does matter is the trend, slightly obvious to those in the field, 
> for traditional tech writing to be replaced by "something else."
> 
> When the older writers of TECHWR-L started there was more tech writing 
> to be done than could possibly be accomplished. Computer-human 
> interfaces were atrocious, and if you didn't RTFM, you were sunk. If 
> nobody WTFM, you were on your own.
> 
> Now the interfaces are decidely better. The Fine Manual, if it even 
> exists, is rarely needed. Some "help" systems are even actually helpful.
> 
> When the manual is needed, to fulfill a requirement or because the 
> humans still need to understand a goodly body of knowledge, it's often 
> prepared by people who are not tech writers. (But that happened back in 
> our Dark Ages, too.)
> 
> The age of tech writers themselves means nearly nothing. I, myself, feel 
> I am 27 years old I but have the hair pattern and the experience to have 
> accomplished more than can be fitted into five years of career. In the 
> wisdom department I combine the mind of a sage and the curiosity of an 
> eight-year-old. Or is it the opposite?
> 
> Back to the list of statistics. I think the most distressing part is the 
> "large corporations" aspect. Which ones? In what phase of their 
> operations? Are we comparing apples to oranges, to prunes, or to 
> steamboats? The looseness of the parameters suggests the best bet might 
> be to state the conclusions desired, and then to select the statistics 
> required for support. Is this part of a plan for some massive government 
> program?
> 
> john rosberg wrote:
> > 
> > Tech Writer of the Beast wrote . . . . 
> > 
> >> I would like to obtain some good statistics on the following:
> >>
> >> Average age?of employed technical writers at large corporations.
> >> Length of time technical writers commonly stay in the field.
> >> Average age of new hires at large corporations and whether it has changed since 2000.
> >> Wage declines (or increases) for technical writers at large corporations over, say, the last decade or perhaps since 2000.
> >> Decrease in numbers of technical writers at large corporations since 2000.
> >> Outsourcing of technical writing positions since 2000, including information about the countries to which the jobs are outsourced.
> >> Anyone know what is the best bet for reliable information on such things?
> >> ?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I suspect you may receive a little more data if you gave some idea about the use to which you wil to put this information, and who you are.
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 09:38:25 -0400
> From: Elaine Garnet <2egarnet -at- rogers -dot- com>
> Subject: Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> To: Peter Neilson <neilson -at- windstream -dot- net>
> Cc: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> Message-ID: <D2FE40F8-88DE-4E71-AF7E-49B1FF2C7953 -at- rogers -dot- com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
> 
> Good grief Peter - 27 and a hair pattern? I am 61 and not everyone 
> works in the computer field. I am still interested in the stats, John.
> 
> 
> On 3-Aug-09, at 9:30 AM, Peter Neilson wrote:
> 
> > In my jaundiced opinion almost none of those parameters are useful for
> > anything that can or should be done, with the possible exception of
> > granting a PhD in a subject that I would prefer to avoid studying.
> >
> > What does matter is the trend, slightly obvious to those in the field,
> > for traditional tech writing to be replaced by "something else."
> >
> > When the older writers of TECHWR-L started there was more tech writing
> > to be done than could possibly be accomplished. Computer-human
> > interfaces were atrocious, and if you didn't RTFM, you were sunk. If
> > nobody WTFM, you were on your own.
> >
> > Now the interfaces are decidely better. The Fine Manual, if it even
> > exists, is rarely needed. Some "help" systems are even actually 
> > helpful.
> >
> > When the manual is needed, to fulfill a requirement or because the
> > humans still need to understand a goodly body of knowledge, it's often
> > prepared by people who are not tech writers. (But that happened back 
> > in
> > our Dark Ages, too.)
> >
> > The age of tech writers themselves means nearly nothing. I, myself, 
> > feel
> > I am 27 years old I but have the hair pattern and the experience to 
> > have
> > accomplished more than can be fitted into five years of career. In the
> > wisdom department I combine the mind of a sage and the curiosity of an
> > eight-year-old. Or is it the opposite?
> >
> > Back to the list of statistics. I think the most distressing part is 
> > the
> > "large corporations" aspect. Which ones? In what phase of their
> > operations? Are we comparing apples to oranges, to prunes, or to
> > steamboats? The looseness of the parameters suggests the best bet 
> > might
> > be to state the conclusions desired, and then to select the statistics
> > required for support. Is this part of a plan for some massive 
> > government
> > program?
> >
> > john rosberg wrote:
> >>
> >> Tech Writer of the Beast wrote . . . .
> >>
> >>> I would like to obtain some good statistics on the following:
> >>>
> >>> Average age?of employed technical writers at large corporations.
> >>> Length of time technical writers commonly stay in the field.
> >>> Average age of new hires at large corporations and whether it has 
> >>> changed since 2000.
> >>> Wage declines (or increases) for technical writers at large 
> >>> corporations over, say, the last decade or perhaps since 2000.
> >>> Decrease in numbers of technical writers at large corporations 
> >>> since 2000.
> >>> Outsourcing of technical writing positions since 2000, including 
> >>> information about the countries to which the jobs are outsourced.
> >>> Anyone know what is the best bet for reliable information on such 
> >>> things?
> >>> ?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I suspect you may receive a little more data if you gave some idea 
> >> about the use to which you wil to put this information, and who you 
> >> are.
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > Free Software Documentation Project Web Cast: Covers developing 
> > Table of
> > Contents, Context IDs, and Index, as well as Doc-To-Help
> > 2009 tips, tricks, and best practices.
> > http://www.doctohelp.com/SuperPages/Webcasts/
> >
> > Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for individual
> > authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface. Write
> > once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and version 
> > control! http://www.helpandmanual.com/
> >
> > ---
> > You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as 2egarnet -at- rogers -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/2egarnet%40rogers.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.
> >
> > Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:
> > http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l-chat
> >
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 10:34:44 -0400
> From: Kat Kuvinka <katkuvinka -at- hotmail -dot- com>
> Subject: RE: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> To: <neilson -at- windstream -dot- net>, <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
> Message-ID: <COL104-W17A1CB33A9E0AFA18B982BD40F0 -at- phx -dot- gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, software is now being developed for industries that had previously been computer-free, and believe it or not, many people are still computer illiterate. Good software development practices and UI design are not necessarily followed...so manuals are just as important than ever.
> 
> 
> 
> For these same reasons, I agree that they are often not being prepared by technical writers.
> 
> kat
> 
> > 
> > 
> > Now the interfaces are decidely better. The Fine Manual, if it even 
> > exists, is rarely needed. Some "help" systems are even actually helpful.
> > 
> > When the manual is needed, to fulfill a requirement or because the 
> > humans still need to understand a goodly body of knowledge, it's often 
> > prepared by people who are not tech writers. (But that happened back in 
> > our Dark Ages, too.)
> > 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your vacation photos on your phone!
> http://windowsliveformobile.com/en-us/photos/default.aspx?&OCID=0809TL-HM
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 7
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 09:03:40 -0700
> From: "Gene Kim-Eng" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
> Subject: Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
> Message-ID: <753D0DA85F3840CB9E68FF1051970957 -at- TDGKimEng>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
> 
> Most of the low hanging fruit (those interested in becoming computer 
> literate) has already been picked, and people who are still computer 
> illiterate tend to be so by choice. The companies that will be the most 
> successful in servicing these users will be those that produce front 
> ends designed to handhold them all the way. Think "TurboTax," your 
> neighborhood ATM, or the menu for your digital cable TV service.
> 
> Things that are simpler upfront are invariably more complex under the 
> hood. There is as much, if not more, documentation needed for 
> simplified user interfaces as there has ever been for more complex ones, 
> but it is mostly be in support of those who must install and service 
> them rather than those who use them, and the depth of product and 
> technology knowledge required to author them is greater. If these 
> documents are often not being prepared by technical writers, perhaps one 
> reason for that is the difficulty of finding writers with the necessary 
> technical background to do the job without having to be spoon-fed 
> information by SMEs.
> 
> Gene Kim-Eng
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Kat Kuvinka" <katkuvinka -at- hotmail -dot- com>
> > Actually, software is now being developed for industries that had 
> > previously been computer-free, and believe it or not, many people are 
> > still computer illiterate. Good software development practices and UI 
> > design are not necessarily followed...so manuals are just as important 
> > than ever.
> >
> > For these same reasons, I agree that they are often not being prepared 
> > by technical writers.
> >
> >> Now the interfaces are decidely better. The Fine Manual, if it even
> >> exists, is rarely needed. Some "help" systems are even actually 
> >> helpful.
> >>
> >> When the manual is needed, to fulfill a requirement or because the
> >> humans still need to understand a goodly body of knowledge, it's 
> >> often
> >> prepared by people who are not tech writers. (But that happened back 
> >> in
> >> our Dark Ages, too.)
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 8
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 13:51:05 -0600
> From: "Combs, Richard" <richard -dot- combs -at- Polycom -dot- com>
> Subject: RE: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> To: "Peter Neilson" <neilson -at- windstream -dot- net>,
> <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
> Message-ID:
> <2D6EB362BFB0CC4A95CC3FC0C2F19F867FBD9A -at- wstexch03 -dot- westminster -dot- polycom -dot- com>
> 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
> 
> Peter Neilson wrote:
> 
> > In my jaundiced opinion almost none of those parameters are useful for
> > anything that can or should be done, with the possible exception of
> > granting a PhD in a subject that I would prefer to avoid studying.
> <snip> 
> > Back to the list of statistics. I think the most distressing part is
> > the
> > "large corporations" aspect. Which ones? In what phase of their
> > operations? Are we comparing apples to oranges, to prunes, or to
> > steamboats? The looseness of the parameters suggests the best bet
> might
> > be to state the conclusions desired, and then to select the statistics
> > required for support. Is this part of a plan for some massive
> > government
> > program?
> 
> I thought the same thing. It sounds like someone with an axe to grind
> who's just looking for a stone that fits. 
> 
> But in many fields, that's what passes for academic research these days.
> 
> 
> Richard
> 
> Richard G. Combs
> Senior Technical Writer
> Polycom, Inc.
> richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom
> 303-223-5111
> ------
> rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom
> 303-777-0436
> ------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 9
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 14:06:19 -0600
> From: "Combs, Richard" <richard -dot- combs -at- Polycom -dot- com>
> Subject: RE: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> To: "Gene Kim-Eng" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>, <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
> Message-ID:
> <2D6EB362BFB0CC4A95CC3FC0C2F19F867FBD9B -at- wstexch03 -dot- westminster -dot- polycom -dot- com>
> 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
> 
> Gene Kim-Eng wrote:
> 
> > Things that are simpler upfront are invariably more complex under the
> > hood. There is as much, if not more, documentation needed for
> > simplified user interfaces as there has ever been for more complex
> > ones,
> > but it is mostly be in support of those who must install and service
> > them rather than those who use them, and the depth of product and
> > technology knowledge required to author them is greater. If these
> > documents are often not being prepared by technical writers, perhaps
> > one
> > reason for that is the difficulty of finding writers with the
> necessary
> > technical background to do the job without having to be spoon-fed
> > information by SMEs.
> 
> Exactly. Except that I'd say what's necessary (and in demand) isn't so
> much an extensive technical background as the ability and willingness to
> learn and understand the technical information. 
> 
> In telecommunications, for instance, a writer who reads the relevant
> RFCs and then asks intelligent questions about the product's conformance
> to the standards is far more valuable than the one who asks the SME,
> "Have you got a write-up about this SIP stuff that I can use?" 
> 
> More valuable still is the writer who can explain to the engineer that
> the latter misinterpreted something in RFC 4028 when he implemented
> support for session timers. I love it when I get to do that. :-)
> 
> Richard
> 
> 
> Richard G. Combs
> Senior Technical Writer
> Polycom, Inc.
> richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom
> 303-223-5111
> ------
> rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom
> 303-777-0436
> ------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 10
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 13:23:18 -0700
> From: "Gene Kim-Eng" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
> Subject: Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> To: "Combs, Richard" <richard -dot- combs -at- Polycom -dot- com>,
> <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
> Message-ID: <19CA0406A42649B7A8B3C04AFA3F8492 -at- TDGKimEng>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
> 
> In most cases, the first choice would be for someone who already has the 
> related knowledge, followed by someone who has "sort of related" 
> knowledge, followed by someone with an established track record of being 
> able to quickly acquire such knowledge.
> 
> Some years ago I helped write the instructions for an engineering 
> application plug-in, mostly because I had been a user of the base app 
> during my previous life as an engineer. It turned out that the only 
> other person on the development team with hands-on user experience had 
> left several months before I was brought in, and they ended up having to 
> throw out a large portion of the work they had done since his departure 
> because I found that the developers had made numerous incorrect 
> assumptions about the way the app was commonly used. My arrival was 
> described as "fortuitous" by the company's CEO, but I don't think the 
> development team was nearly as happy about it at first...
> 
> Gene Kim-Eng
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Combs, Richard" <richard -dot- combs -at- Polycom -dot- com>
> >Exactly. Except that I'd say what's necessary (and in demand) isn't so
> >much an extensive technical background as the ability and willingness 
> >to
> >learn and understand the technical information.
> 
> >In telecommunications, for instance, a writer who reads the relevant
> >RFCs and then asks intelligent questions about the product's 
> >conformance
> >to the standards is far more valuable than the one who asks the SME,
> >"Have you got a write-up about this SIP stuff that I can use?"
> 
> >More valuable still is the writer who can explain to the engineer that
> >the latter misinterpreted something in RFC 4028 when he implemented
> >support for session timers. I love it when I get to do that. :-)
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 11
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 16:51:28 -0400
> From: Kat Kuvinka <katkuvinka -at- hotmail -dot- com>
> Subject: RE: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> To: <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>, <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
> Message-ID: <COL104-W48CE2690586D98B4153FBFD40F0 -at- phx -dot- gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> 
> 
> I don't agree. I think we use computers every day so we think everybody else does. They affect most of us, for sure. But my point was not whether we decide if the ATM is preferable to the live teller, or if should we do our taxes online. My last job involved software for the printing industry. There is a lot of resistance to changing from scheduling on a white board to scheduling using a software package. Now I am writing for the medical industry, and finding that some doctors can't even use a mouse. Good end-user documentation is still needed, and it should be developed by good communicators who can write without assuming their audience can use a simple UI.
> 
> I know a lot of people who don't own or use computers, cell phones, or even cars.
> 
> > 
> > Most of the low hanging fruit (those interested in becoming computer 
> > literate) has already been picked, and people who are still computer 
> > illiterate tend to be so by choice. The companies that will be the most 
> > successful in servicing these users will be those that produce front 
> > ends designed to handhold them all the way. Think "TurboTax," your 
> > neighborhood ATM, or the menu for your digital cable TV service.
> > 
> > Things that are simpler upfront are invariably more complex under the 
> > hood. There is as much, if not more, documentation needed for 
> > simplified user interfaces as there has ever been for more complex ones, 
> > but it is mostly be in support of those who must install and service 
> > them rather than those who use them, and the depth of product and 
> > technology knowledge required to author them is greater. If these 
> > documents are often not being prepared by technical writers, perhaps one 
> > reason for that is the difficulty of finding writers with the necessary 
> > technical background to do the job without having to be spoon-fed 
> > information by SMEs.
> > 
> > Gene Kim-Eng
> > 
> >
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your vacation photos on your phone!
> http://windowsliveformobile.com/en-us/photos/default.aspx?&OCID=0809TL-HM
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 12
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 14:05:34 -0700
> From: "Gene Kim-Eng" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
> Subject: Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
> Message-ID: <F71B1B5F19A2467DBFF9509C6675FFCD -at- TDGKimEng>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
> 
> And most all of these people are the way they are by choice, at least in 
> the US, Canada and Western Europe. The people who are resistant to 
> changing to software and don't even know how to use a mouse in the 
> situations you describe have not been denied access to computers; they 
> have for the most part avoided them by choice, and will continue to do 
> so unless they are provided with tools that are instantly intuitive or 
> hold their hands from beginning to end (touchscreens instead of mice, 
> talking interfaces, etc.). "Good end-user documentation" for most of 
> those that succeed will be embedded in the tools.
> 
> Gene Kim-Eng
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Kat Kuvinka" <katkuvinka -at- hotmail -dot- com>
> I don't agree. I think we use computers every day so we think everybody 
> else does. They affect most of us, for sure. But my point was not 
> whether we decide if the ATM is preferable to the live teller, or if 
> should we do our taxes online. My last job involved software for the 
> printing industry. There is a lot of resistance to changing from 
> scheduling on a white board to scheduling using a software package. Now 
> I am writing for the medical industry, and finding that some doctors 
> can't even use a mouse. Good end-user documentation is still needed, and 
> it should be developed by good communicators who can write without 
> assuming their audience can use a simple UI.
> 
> I know a lot of people who don't own or use computers, cell phones, or 
> even cars.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 13
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 14:22:27 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Keith Hood <klhra -at- yahoo -dot- com>
> Subject: Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com, Gene Kim-Eng <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
> Message-ID: <715522 -dot- 74024 -dot- qm -at- web36301 -dot- mail -dot- mud -dot- yahoo -dot- com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> 
> 
> I have to agree with Gene on this one. It has been my experience that doctors and lawyers are particularly resistant to learning how to use computers. They want their office staff to be computer-literate but they generally feel they have to save their available memory and brain power for thinking about the things they consider *really* important. In part it's a status thing and in part it's a belief-in-workload thing. As my father put it, at his age he doesn't have the time or the inclination to go back to school for the convenience of a !$# -at- !Q@# machine. What those people need is not a good manual that they won't read because they resent the idea that they have to study something not related to their work; they need applications that have simpler UIs, or with built-in guide features.
> 
> I think there would be a market for a completely different type of help system, one that does not require the user to open a help system in a different window. A lot of times, when people want directions on how to do something, they do not want to navigate away from where they were working. I've noticed a lot of times, people who are not comfortable with computers don't like using the help because they are hesitant about switching to a help window; they're worried they won't be able to get back to the right places where they were trying to work earlier. I can envision help code that doesn't open a CHM file or a Web page, but simply sticks pointers on the screen with arrows labeled "First click here" and then "In this field, enter your age" and then "Now click here." I think that would be more helpful to people who are reluctant to learn computer usage because it's closer to having someone lean over and point and say "click here," which is what they
> really want when they try to get help. 
> 
> 
> --- On Mon, 8/3/09, Gene Kim-Eng <techwr -at- genek -dot- com> wrote:
> 
> > From: Gene Kim-Eng <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
> > Subject: Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> > To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> > Date: Monday, August 3, 2009, 5:05 PM
> > And most all of these people are the
> > way they are by choice, at least in 
> > the US, Canada and Western Europe.? The people who are
> > resistant to 
> > changing to software and don't even know how to use a mouse
> > in the 
> > situations you describe have not been denied access to
> > computers; they 
> > have for the most part avoided them by choice, and will
> > continue to do 
> > so unless they are provided with tools that are instantly
> > intuitive or 
> > hold their hands from beginning to end (touchscreens
> > instead of mice, 
> > talking interfaces, etc.).? "Good end-user
> > documentation" for most of 
> > those that succeed will be embedded in the tools.
> > 
> > Gene Kim-Eng
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 14
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 17:40:38 -0400
> From: voxwoman <voxwoman -at- gmail -dot- com>
> Subject: Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> To: Keith Hood <klhra -at- yahoo -dot- com>
> Cc: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> Message-ID:
> <310338340908031440j66df8f71m337f2992ad2ca35f -at- mail -dot- gmail -dot- com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> And that's how "Clippy" was invented. ("I see you are typing an email. Can I
> help you with that?")
> 
> Obviously, there is a lot of work to do to accomplish this sort of help.
> -Wendy
> 
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Keith Hood <klhra -at- yahoo -dot- com> wrote:
> 
> >
> > I have to agree with Gene on this one. It has been my experience that
> > doctors and lawyers are particularly resistant to learning how to use
> > computers. They want their office staff to be computer-literate but they
> > generally feel they have to save their available memory and brain power for
> > thinking about the things they consider *really* important. In part it's a
> > status thing and in part it's a belief-in-workload thing. As my father put
> > it, at his age he doesn't have the time or the inclination to go back to
> > school for the convenience of a !$# -at- !Q@# machine. What those people need
> > is not a good manual that they won't read because they resent the idea that
> > they have to study something not related to their work; they need
> > applications that have simpler UIs, or with built-in guide features.
> >
> > I think there would be a market for a completely different type of help
> > system, one that does not require the user to open a help system in a
> > different window. A lot of times, when people want directions on how to do
> > something, they do not want to navigate away from where they were working.
> > I've noticed a lot of times, people who are not comfortable with computers
> > don't like using the help because they are hesitant about switching to a
> > help window; they're worried they won't be able to get back to the right
> > places where they were trying to work earlier. I can envision help code that
> > doesn't open a CHM file or a Web page, but simply sticks pointers on the
> > screen with arrows labeled "First click here" and then "In this field, enter
> > your age" and then "Now click here." I think that would be more helpful to
> > people who are reluctant to learn computer usage because it's closer to
> > having someone lean over and point and say "click here," which is what they
> > really want when they try to get help.
> >
> >
> > --- On Mon, 8/3/09, Gene Kim-Eng <techwr -at- genek -dot- com> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Gene Kim-Eng <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
> > > Subject: Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> > > To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> > > Date: Monday, August 3, 2009, 5:05 PM
> > > And most all of these people are the
> > > way they are by choice, at least in
> > > the US, Canada and Western Europe. The people who are
> > > resistant to
> > > changing to software and don't even know how to use a mouse
> > > in the
> > > situations you describe have not been denied access to
> > > computers; they
> > > have for the most part avoided them by choice, and will
> > > continue to do
> > > so unless they are provided with tools that are instantly
> > > intuitive or
> > > hold their hands from beginning to end (touchscreens
> > > instead of mice,
> > > talking interfaces, etc.). "Good end-user
> > > documentation" for most of
> > > those that succeed will be embedded in the tools.
> > >
> > > Gene Kim-Eng
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > Free Software Documentation Project Web Cast: Covers developing Table of
> > Contents, Context IDs, and Index, as well as Doc-To-Help
> > 2009 tips, tricks, and best practices.
> > http://www.doctohelp.com/SuperPages/Webcasts/
> >
> > Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for individual
> > authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface. Write
> > once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and version control!
> > http://www.helpandmanual.com/
> >
> > ---
> > You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as voxwoman -at- gmail -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/voxwoman%40gmail.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.
> >
> > Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:
> > http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l-chat
> >
> >
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 15
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 19:12:43 -0400
> From: Kat Kuvinka <katkuvinka -at- hotmail -dot- com>
> Subject: RE: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> To: <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>, <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
> Message-ID: <COL104-W250C7A518FF417A6EFE30D40F0 -at- phx -dot- gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> 
> 
> Well, some people just don't care about computers ;^) ...they don't care, and they don't want to use them even if they have access. They don't know what they are missing, or do not feel like they are missing anything.
> 
> As for our profession, we are definitely in the next wave, and you are right, we must find new ways to reach our audience. 
> 
> > 
> > And most all of these people are the way they are by choice, at least in 
> > the US, Canada and Western Europe. The people who are resistant to 
> > changing to software and don't even know how to use a mouse in the 
> > situations you describe have not been denied access to computers; they 
> > have for the most part avoided them by choice, and will continue to do 
> > so unless they are provided with tools that are instantly intuitive or 
> > hold their hands from beginning to end (touchscreens instead of mice, 
> > talking interfaces, etc.). "Good end-user documentation" for most of 
> > those that succeed will be embedded in the tools.
> > 
> > Gene Kim-Eng
> > 
> >
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your vacation photos on your phone!
> http://windowsliveformobile.com/en-us/photos/default.aspx?&OCID=0809TL-HM
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 16
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 16:33:07 -0700
> From: Robert Lauriston <robert -at- lauriston -dot- com>
> Subject: Re: Is recession proof? Instructional Technologists/Technical
> Writers
> To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> Message-ID:
> <1c13e71c0908031633x290bdb48qd8451373c359aa0 -at- mail -dot- gmail -dot- com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> In my experience, those jobs are more likely to be moved offshore than
> tech-writer jobs.
> 
> >> From: klhra -at- yahoo -dot- com
> >> ... If you are worried about finding a job that has potential to last through a business downturn, get a job that is more closely related to the core business of the industry. That means a job that companies see as being part of the process that creates marketable product. That means things like engineering, programming, database management, Web programming, or quality assurance work. Workers in those fields are more likely to be retained when a company shrinks, because they can quantify how their work affects the bottom line on the quarterly report. ...
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 17
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 16:45:52 -0700
> From: "Gene Kim-Eng" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
> Subject: Re: Source for statistics on the technical writing field
> To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
> Message-ID: <AF4E889CD66345069F888F74CF56D47A -at- TDGKimEng>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
> 
> I think some of the people you described earlier probably will make some 
> kind of transition eventually, IF designers have the smarts to provide 
> computer-based tools in forms that are acceptable to the way they want 
> to work. The printshop people could end up with some sort of 
> pen/touch-based screen that looks and feels like writing on a 
> whiteboard, and the doctors may take a liking to tablets that mimic 
> prescription pads and lab order forms but send data wirelessly to 
> pharmacies and other services. The key is that the technology must adapt 
> to the typical user and not expect everybody to do things the other way 
> around if you want to have a user base that goes beyond the tech 
> early-adopters who can't wait to get their hands on "the next big 
> thing."
> 
> Gene Kim-Eng
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Kat Kuvinka" <katkuvinka -at- hotmail -dot- com>
> >Well, some people just don't care about computers ;^) ...they don't 
> >care, and
> >they don't want to use them even if they have access. They don't know 
> >what
> >they are missing, or do not feel like they are missing anything.
> 
> >As for our profession, we are definitely in the next wave, and you are 
> >right,
> >we must find new ways to reach our audience.
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 18
> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 00:50:21 -0400
> From: Bill Swallow <techcommdood -at- gmail -dot- com>
> Subject: Re: To continue OFF-TOPIC topics...
> To: Kathleen MacDowell <kathleen -at- writefortheuser -dot- com>
> Cc: TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
> Message-ID:
> <375e3cb30908032150y4f8e3716qb85c77ba4770a076 -at- mail -dot- gmail -dot- com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> I thought it was an informative thread that is ON-TOPIC to my needs as
> a consultant trying to drum up business after over 10 years out of the
> consulting business. VOIP is something I'm keenly interested in due to
> many of my client interactions taking place via contacts in varying
> countries. Had this been posted on the off-topic list, I doubt I'd
> ever have seen it.
> 
> Perhaps we should define the scope of technical writing for the sake
> of the list? As Geoff mentioned, how is VOIP any different from DITA?
> What if someone has an Excel question? And is marcomm out of the
> question as well?
> 
> On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Kathleen
> MacDowell<kathleen -at- writefortheuser -dot- com> wrote:
> > I appreciate all the people who've followed up on my original post--but that
> > post was an oversight on my part.
> >
> > Out of all the lists available to people everywhere, this is a great one,
> > with skilled people who are conversant in a wide range of technologies. So
> > it seemed the natural place to go for info on this subject.
> >
> > But I did forget the list guidelines, and in appreciation of the fact that I
> > haven't been banned by our kind moderator and list owner, I'd respectfully
> > like to encourage people to move this discussion to the chat list. It's easy
> > to sign up!
> 
> -- 
> Bill Swallow
> 
> Twitter: @techcommdood
> Blog: http://techcommdood.com
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/techcommdood
> 
> Available for contract and full time opportunities.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------
> STC Ideas: http://stcideas.ning.com
> Join: http://stcideas.ning.com/?xgi=6X1vNGI
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to 
> TECHWR-L.
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
> http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l
> Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit 
> http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
> 
> End of TECHWR-L Digest, Vol 46, Issue 4
> ***************************************

_________________________________________________________________
Express your personality in color! Preview and select themes for Hotmail®. 
http://www.windowslive-hotmail.com/LearnMore/personalize.aspx?ocid=PID23391::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HYGN_express:082009
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Free Software Documentation Project Web Cast: Covers developing Table of
Contents, Context IDs, and Index, as well as Doc-To-Help  
2009 tips, tricks, and best practices.
http://www.doctohelp.com/SuperPages/Webcasts/

Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for individual
authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface. Write
once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and version control! 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. 

Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:
http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l-chat