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.
Bonni Graham says:
> For example, maybe we should have different subcategories under manuals.
> Rather than hard vs. soft and reference vs. user vs. tutorial vs. quick
> reference, perhaps they should be by subject matter
Off on a tangent, your listing of reference/user/tutorial/quick-reference
inspires me to wonder:
What are the commonly accepted definitions of these terms?
And what other terms are there like this?
Perhaps, if there aren't any, we could come up with a set of commonly
In the study of rhetoric, there's a concept called "terministic
screens", meaning that you filter incoming messages through a set of
terms, according to the context or your profession. So, for example,
if you talk to a programmer about programming topics, the terms "job",
"routine", "task", etc, have very specific meanings and will affect
how the programmer perceives your message.
I think these screens are actually helpful; having a defined meaning
for the jargon provides clarity, when you're planning a book, for