Using production people (was ...)

[Kris Olberg <KJOlberg -at- AOL -dot- COM>]

I'm going to incorporate a couple of recent threads ("PageMaker: what to do"
and "focus too deeply on DTP") into this new one with a more appropriate
subject line.

Seems I touched some hot buttons with my opinions on how focusing too much on
DTP issues is bad for our profession. The responses came from several angles.
You've all read them, so I won't repeat them. Sounds like some of you have
had bad experiences with DTP/designers. We've all had them. I can cite
hundreds of examples where my stuff was butchered. But I can also cite
thousands of examples where they removed the barriers to me being able to
provide a quality information product.

Let's step back for a moment. Many of you assumed that I advocate giving up
quite a bit of control to DTP/designers. This is not true. I do not advocate
giving up control over presentation methods. I would never expect DTP to know
when information belongs in a table, bulleted list, graphic, and so on. What
I do advocate as appropriate for DTP are the following kinds of tasks:

Keystroking text and tables or pouring flat text files into templates
Adding headers and footers (if dictated by style guidelines)
Proofing the writer's formatting for compliance with style guidelines
Adding page breaks
Updating the TOC
Updating the index (from the tool's perspective only, not writing the
entries)
Keylining any 'hard" graphics
Ensuring that fronts/backs match before going to reproduction
Spell checking

Even still, DTP should not have the final word on any of these decisions.
What's the key to making a DTP-to-writer relationship work? Teamwork. DTP
cannot work in a vacuum. Writers have to spend time working with them. For
example, although DTP may initially add page breaks, ultimately the writer
needs to verify that the breaks are appropriate for the content.

In the end, my opinion is that we technical writers need to focus more on the
content, and I'm sticking to it. I've managed too many projects in which the
writer showed me a document that looked great, but was less filling. Maybe a
term wasn't defined, a paragraph explaining a concept was missed, there was
no glossary, there was no index, there was no Chapter 6. If a document looks
great but the reader can't find the information either because it's
irretrievable or because it's not there, what good is the document? I will
still prefer to spend the majority of my time working with a product--playing
with it, touching it, looking at it, talking to others about it--and writing
the document.

For the rest of you, you need to do what you works for you.

Regards...Kris
kjolberg -at- aol -dot- com
kjolberg -at- ix -dot- netcom -dot- com
102031 -dot- 3556 -at- compuserve -dot- com