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.
> My point is that I suppose there are TWs out there who just
> pound out docs based on what they are told, though I have no
> idea how you can create original content that way. However,
> until this point, I had considered that rare.
I'm guessing you don't live in NJ, Sean. I swear that out here
there are *tons* of these format-monkeys calling themselves
tech writers, and I think it's leading to a general dumbing-down
of the reputation of the whole profession. I've been on interviews
where people have been surprised by the questions I asked, amazed
at some of the skills I was bringing to the table. I've also been
on interviews where what they really wanted was a copy editor or
<gag> an administrative assistant with some limited technical
knowledge.
I'll never forget interviewing with the guy who said, "Why would
you want to know that?" when I asked if there were any background
books on SS7 that he could recommend, so I could get up to speed
before I started the job. Bye-bye, buddy!
> I had always thought using and learning (quickly) about
> the item you were documenting was the best, nay, only
> way to effectively communicate the subject in a way that
> is understandable to any target audience.
True if you're documenting software, which I assume you are. But
I've done a few jobs where it just wasn't possible to install and
use whatever it was and still got great manuals out the door. Of
course, I often had to come in at 1am and bug the system testers to
let me try stuff out, but I digress.
> And, FWIW, I have frequently run into those whose comfort
> level with Word's workflow has lead them to conclude FrameMaker
> is garbage. I have found that I can pretty much use any tool I am
> presented with, sure I have a favorite, but the specific tool is
> at least secondary to the goal of production.
I agree with this, although I'll come out of the closet right away
and say I'm not a fan of Word for long manuals, and I prefer not to
take jobs where Word is the primary documentation production tool. But
I think the way some people hate it is a little weird, just like I
think it's a little weird to looooooove FrameMaker in that sloppy way
some people do, or hate it. If you can't objectively assess a tool and
move on, how do you pick the tools for your projects?!
*** Deva(tm) Tools for Dreamweaver and Deva(tm) Search ***
Build Contents, Indexes, and Search for Web Sites and Help Systems
Available now at http://www.devahelp.com or info -at- devahelp -dot- com
Sponsored by Information Mapping, Inc., a professional services firm
specializing in Knowledge Management and e-content solutions. See http://www.infomap.com or 800-463-6627 for more about our solutions.
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
