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: Re. Writing by provocation From:Elna Tymes <Etymes -at- LTS -dot- COM/> Date:Mon, 14 Aug 1995 00:00:08 GMT
geoff-h -at- mtl -dot- feric -dot- ca wrote:
>As several posters noted, getting information by inserting errors into
>a document for the authors to catch (or inserting comments and
>questions for them to answer) is a dangerous strategy.
<snip>
<... there's another serious risk: loss of credibility.
>The best way to work with an author is to establish a relationship of
>mutual respect and consideration, ideally with questions delivered
>in-person if you're working at the same site.
<<fatuous, self-serving comments deleted>>
The best way to work with an author (or "source," as is true most of the
time, since most of these folks only have passing familiarity with
writing clean sentences) is to have their complete, undivided, and
appreciative attention. I haven't had situations like that in years.
Neither have most technical writers.
The whole point of writing by provocation is that it is one tactic in an
arsenal of techniques used to get the information you need to produce a
clean, readable document. And it is only one. In an ideal world, you
don't need to provoke your souce information - it comes to you neatly
wrapped and complete. In some 25 years of technical writing, including
authoring or coauthoring 31 published books and literally tons of
technical manuals, papers, Help systems, presentations, and Internet
material, I have yet to see an "ideal" situation.
Most of us operate in situations where designs are incomplete, subject to
change, and poorly commented, and where source people (programmers and
engineers) are too busy doing other things to take the necessary time for
a writer to produce a completely accurate draft. In most cases, the
finished document is due within days after the coded product is done,
which means that the diligent writer is necessarily trying to track a
moving target. In most cases, drafts put out for review contain
incomplete or inaccurate information, partly because the product is
changing or hasn't been completed, and partly because the source people
have been too busy to provide the information. At that point, writing by
provocation is ONE of the tools a writer can use to make sure the correct
information gets into subsequent drafts.
Close, respectful working relationship are fine and dandy when one has
the time; most projects these days are done under incredibly tight
deadlines and working situations that require everyone to scramble.
