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.
Subject:Re: Procedures in real time From:Jan Cohen <najnehoc -at- yahoo -dot- com> To:techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com Date:Fri, 18 Jun 2010 07:49:33 -0700 (PDT)
I agree. But short of "bend over and kiss your butt goodbye," I was thinking more or less about procedures that might be used during an actual incident where time is of the essence.
In the case of the BP disaster, there's surely nothing that could be done except try to save one's self. As for the unchocked rolling aircraft, my guess is that the chocking steps are already written into aircraft recovery procedures. In this case the incident probably occurred because people were in a hurry and didn't have their minds on the task at hand, insufficiently trained, or both of these and any number of other reasons. Though procedures are written for a lot of things and those using them should be thoroughly familiar with them, they're not necessarily always referenced during the course of a job.
That's what I meant about "procedures in real time."
________________________________
From: Gene Kim-Eng <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Sent: Thu, June 17, 2010 10:26:24 PM
Subject: Re: Procedures in real time
Hopefully without starting up an off-topic political discussion, it's actually
the reverse. There was a great deal that could have done "to prevent the loss
of life and equipment that occurred at the time of the blow-out," by
implementing *and following* procedures to prevent the blow-out from happening.
But it has been evident for decades to anyone who isn't out to make money in the
oil industry or to curry political favor with the industry's deep pockets that
once a blow-out occurs a mile beneath the surface of the ocean there isn't a
damned thing that can be done to "stem its aftermath."
Gene Kim-Eng
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jan Cohen" <najnehoc -at- yahoo -dot- com>
In the case of the BP disaster, it's fairly evident that little could be done to
prevent the loss of life and equipment that occurred at the time of the blow
out; but it's not so evident that more couldn't have been done in the days and
weeks immediately following the incident to help stem its aftermath.
Gain access to everything you need to create and publish documentation,
manuals, and other information through multiple channels. Choose
authoring (and import) as well as virtually any output you may need. http://www.doctohelp.com/
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
