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.
Re: Checking the checkers through inaccurate information
Subject:Re: Checking the checkers through inaccurate information From:Will Kelly <willk -at- TIAC -dot- NET> Date:Wed, 8 Jan 1997 20:26:04 -0500
Carl--
I can speak as both a technical writer and a technical reviewer. Sitting in
both chairs has given me some perspective as a technical writer. I have
technical reviewed training guides and some third-party computer books.
>
>This sounds all too familiar. For time to time I put a little
>documentation joke in my draft intended for a technical review.
Your little "documentation jokes" are wasting somebody's time. That person
often times is somebody who has probably put in a full 8 hour day and still
has to read your document. As a technical reviewer, I have encountered such
"documentation jokes". Upon each encounter, the "joke" lowered the writer's
credibility in my eyes as a professional and a team player. I made sure
that I noted such jokes and that my client or manager was made aware.
>
>1. Would you consider this unethical or underhanded? (I have a pretty
> good reputation with these people for a solid final product, so I
> have a little more leeway here. I'd *never* try this with a new
> client.
It is unprofessional. Is your good reputation with a manager who is never
around or with the person who has to trod through your "documentation
jokes"? As a writer, I like to add value to the team. As a reviewer, I like
it best when I am dazzled by the writer who has really made the effort to
produce a class document draft.
>
>2. If you did do this sort of thing, how to handle a "miss?"
I would never do that sort of a thing. I like to be trusted by my co-workers.
>
>3. Any other, perhaps more up front, methods for checking the checkers?
Try to write up your expectations for a technical review. While
documentation may never be as high on some people's prioirity as the
writer's, some people just don't know how to review a document. This is
your opportunity as a technical writer to educate your co-workers and not
make them the butt of your jokes.
Will
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Will Kelly Freelance Writer * Technical Editor * Consultant mailto:willk -at- tiac -dot- net http://www.tiac.net/users/willk
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/ or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html
