Re: *New* Techwriting

Subject: Re: *New* Techwriting
From: Sean Fitzpatrick <Sean -dot- Fitzpatrick -at- SMED -dot- COM>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 12:45:28 -0500

Carolyn wrote:
>He stated on frequent occasions that spelling was superfluous and unimportant.

One time a committee reported to the Information Development department
proposals for measuring quality. One of them was "correct spelling". An old
tech writer and editor, who had literally written the book on parts of the
subject, spoke up from the back of the room: "Correct spelling is not a
quality indicator; it is a condition of employment."

>We are required to *document the software application* rather than
>write a manual that will actually help our users do their jobs better
>and more easily

These are two different but equally worthy efforts. If you want to do the
latter, you have to develop a business case showing that it is needed and that
the present documentation isn't adequate. It also would help if you could show
that more writers won't be needed because the present documentation isn't
really needed.

Sean Fitzpatrick

*, or

Previous by Author: Re: Not Wanted--Technical Writers
Next by Author: Certifed Techs
Previous by Thread: *New* Techwriting
Next by Thread: Anonymous Posts

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads