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: STC Letter to the Editor From:"Dick Margulis " <margulis -at- mail -dot- fiam -dot- net> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Sat, 2 Nov 2002 20:00:11 -0500
Bruce Byfield <bbyfield -at- axionet -dot- com> wrote:
>
>Andrew Plato wrote:
>
>> This is why STC competitions are utterly worthless. The judges are selecting
>> winners based on superficial aspects like design and layout.
>
>As you can probably guess from my past posts,I wouldn't call design and
>layout superficial aspects. However, I agree that if an award is given
>on this basis, then its criteria ought to be clearly identified in the
>title of the award.
And Dick adds:
The American Institute of Graphic Arts is the place to submit work if you want a design award. Their competitions are prestigious, national, and well funded. And they don't give a damn about the accuracy, utility, or intelligent organization of the content.
I should hope that STC judges consider those aspects above prettiness of design. If they don't, then shame on them!
Nonetheless, basic design competence and an understanding of readability have a bearing on the utility of a document. It shouldn't matter if all entries in a tech publication contest happen to have been poured into the same template that came with the publishing or word processing program. It isn't a question of whether the author is a great artist, just whether the author selected an appropriate format for presenting the information.
Some readers--Andrew, for example--are not particularly sensitive to presentation issues. Wall-to-wall Courier with quarter-inch margins and no paragraph breaks is apparently okay as long as the facts are correct. Other readers get more out of a document if readability issues are considered. That's okay; it's what makes chocolate and vanilla. I think (in agreement with Bruce) that judges ought to be cognizant of that dimension and give it as much weight as their guidelines suggest.
But I am 100% in agreement that if an award is advertised as being for technical documentation, then the quality of the technical content should be the most important aspect.
IMHO, IANAL, IANAJ, IANASTCM, YMMV, etc.,
Dick
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All-new RoboHelp X3 is now shipping! Get single sourcing, print-quality
documentation, conditional text and much more, in the most monumental
release ever. Save $100! Order online at http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l
Check out SnagIt - The Screen Capture Standard!
Download a free 30-day trial from http://www.techsmith.com/rdr/txt/twr
Find out what all the other tech writers, including Dan, already know!
---
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.
