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: Of myth and reality From:SteveFJong -at- aol -dot- com To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Mon, 22 Jul 2002 20:19:17 EDT
Some of the questions David Knopf <david -at- knopf -dot- com> asks pertain to points I
made to Sean, but I'm happy to respond to him as well...
>> What would a 1-page MIF file demonstrate?
It would demonstrate how easy (or difficult) it is to write within the
single-source discipline.
>>> [Steve] My concern, based on watching working
>>> writers confront [the issue of granularity], is that their answer is,
>>> "I don't | want to be that granular."
>> But they *will* get that granular.
Unless they are compelled to work in a single source, they won't--that's my
point. [Perhaps you're thinking of an environment where there's no choice in
the matter, in which case my point is moot. I'm thinking of the case of
trying to adopt the methodology, in which it's not.]
>> Why does [writing two different text blocks] not count if
>> you do this a single source environment?
Because then you're losing the advantage of single-sourcing.
>> Why would you try to [thread together pedagogical material, procedure,
>> and reference material into a single block]? Pedagogical, procedural, and
>> reference material often go in separate documents, never mind about
>> separate text blocks. I don't see a connection to single sourcing here.
Because I'm trying to save effort; isn't that the idea? The Digital effort
began with the merger of the training and writing groups. Both sides agreed
there was tremendous overlap of information; what they never agreed on was a
unified presentation. Even if the sides had agreed, the central-committee
approach to tag definition would have doomed their best efforts.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Buy RoboHelp Deluxe starting at only $798: you'll get RoboDemo, the hot new
software demonstration tool that's taking the Help authoring world by storm,
together with RoboHelp Office. Learn more at http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l
Your monthly sponsorship message here reaches more than
5000 technical writers, providing 2,500,000+ monthly impressions.
Contact Eric (ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com) for details and availability.
---
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.
