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.
I wrote highly detailed installation, operation, programing and service
manuals using Word. The documents ranged from 50 to over 500 pages and I had
very few problems with Word. The documents were full of linked references.
One thing I did not reference however were images. They were all imbedded
because I didn't have total control over the location in the servers where
my images would be stored. (I was in Vermont and later Michigan and the
servers were in Germany.)
As for being viewed as "unnecessary overhead," it comes with the territory.
In my last position however, I was elevated to senior management level. That
was because the VP of Operations understood the need for good documentation.
Our customers were chip makers and shoddy docs often meant wasted
wafers......and that meant a lot of money.
" Restricting the use of tools to Word because everyone has it, borders on
stupidity, incompetence, arrogance, and corporate malfeasance..."
Hmm....interesting....totally wrong, but that is your opinion. I've worked
at companies who relied totally on Frame and found their docs to be no
better than those created in Word.....and most of the companies I've worked
at were run by people who were neither stupid, incompetent, or arrogant. In
fact, in my over 50 years as a tech writer, I've found just the opposite.
Just my opinion and my experience....
Al Geist-Geist Arts
Fine Art Photography
Mobile: 231-301-5770
E-mail: al -at- geistarts -dot- com
Website: www.geistarts.com
Facebook: Geist Arts
See Also:
Technical Communication, Help, Documentation Management
"...I walked to work, quit my job, and kept walking. Better to be a pilgrim
without a destination, I figured, than to cross the wrong threshold each
day." (Sy Safransky)
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Turner [mailto:quills -at- airmail -dot- net]
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2014 8:47 AM
To: al -at- geistarts -dot- com
Subject: Re: What folks today don't know...!
Tools have limits. Word has lots of limits. If you are writing letters,
those limits do not affect you. If you are writing documents that are
complex, long and require linked references, the limits of the tool make
efficient work nearly impossible. I find it ironic that companies will spend
lavishly for expert staff, yet when it comes to a cost effective
documentation tool, balk and refuse to listen to expert staff.
You can program with notepad. Yet doing so is incredibly stupid when there
are tools that make the process efficient and agile.
Currently, in the financial industry there is a mandate to document
processes. This is driven by Federal law. Yet the senior management of
companies still view technical writers as mainly unnecessary overhead,
rather than as the instruments if risk reduction. The CFPB is now getting
started with audits. Their view if documentation is very similar to that of
ISO, if it isn't documented you don't do it. And their fines are not going
to be very easy to get over.
Using a to that allows a technical writer to swiftly complete and deploy
documentation of complex and extensive processes is essential.
Restricting the use of tools to Word because everyone has it, borders on
stupidity, incompetence, arrogance, and corporate malfeasance.
But then, I'm only the expert staff. If they want to dig the Panama Canal
with spoons who am I to tell them it isn't a wise idea?
> On Aug 4, 2014, at 6:53, "Al Geist" <al -at- geistarts -dot- com> wrote:
>
> I tend to agree with Mike about tools and employers. I've had
> employers who wanted everything written in Word because prior to my
> arrival, the engineering staff wrote all the content and a pseudo
> technical writers formatted it for publication. The person I replaced
> didn't have a clue how Word worked and constantly complained about not
> having FrameMaker. Had he learned the tool his employer required him
> to use, his life would have been easier and his employment at that company
longer.
>
> Al Geist-Geist Arts
> Fine Art Photography
> Mobile: 231-301-5770
> E-mail: al -at- geistarts -dot- com
> Website: www.geistarts.com
> Facebook: Geist Arts
> See Also:
> Technical Communication, Help, Documentation Management
>
> "...I walked to work, quit my job, and kept walking. Better to be a
> pilgrim without a destination, I figured, than to cross the wrong
> threshold each day." (Sy Safransky)
>
>
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Read about how Georgia System Operation Corporation improved teamwork,
> communication, and efficiency using Doc-To-Help |
>http://bit.ly/1lRPd2l
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as quills -at- airmail -dot- net -dot-
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
>
> Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
>http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources and
info.
>
> Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our
> online magazine at http://techwhirl.com
>
> Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our
> public email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Read about how Georgia System Operation Corporation improved teamwork, communication, and efficiency using Doc-To-Help | http://bit.ly/1lRPd2l
