Re: Proof that content is more important than style

[Andrew Plato <gilliankitty -at- yahoo -dot- com>]

Gregory Holmes" <> wrote in message news:176877 -at- techwr-l -dot-  -dot-  -dot- 

> This reminds me of discussing politics with the simple-minded.  If I don't
> constantly reiterate that I love clean air, peace, and children, they seem to
> assume that I don't.  To me, those things are just a given.
> 
> Thus, to me, it is a given that content must be:
> 1. there
> 2. accurate
> 
> I don't see the need to constantly go on about it.  I could offer another
> personal experience, about the scattered but fairly accurate docs for
> "the new system" vs. the organized, structured docs for "the old system" in
> a certain organization, but I don't think it would help Andrew any.  It would 
> just be another anecdote to be dismissed.

Okay, then answer this: why then do writers on this list, throughout all of STC
and in all these certification courses spend the grand majority of their effort
and time on issues of style, structure, and layout? If it is "given" that content
be "there" and "accurate" then one would think that professional organizations
and writers would give content a little more prominent place in the scheme of
things.

Everybody seems quick to agree with me, but that doesn't translate into what I
read and see. My personal anecdotes are about user manuals that contain totally
misleading information, lack any insight, and fail to address fundamental
technical prerequisites. 

If content is such a given, then why are so many writers having such a hard time
getting it right?

My theory is that content is basically given lip service. Everybody agrees that
it's important, but nobody *really* wants to do what it takes to get it right.
Therefore, a three-step rationalization is used:

1. Reassignment: Offload all responsibility for content to the mystical SME. When
the docs are wrong and useless, blame the SME who didn't deliver complete
information. 

2. Redirection: Argue that style and structure are of equal importance to the
content. 

3. Redefinition: Because style and structure are so important, the writer must
focus most of his/her time on ensure that is done properly.

Once these three things are in place, our writer is free to deal with matters of
structure and ignore all matters of content - as that is no longer his/her job. 

I think this is why so much documentation is so bad. Writers are not being held
responsible for their content, and as such they are putting out crap. If
companies started holding their writers responsible for the accuracy of the
documentation, you would see a dramatic shift away from style and structure as
writers began to worry more about content. 

And the RFCs are a good example of that. They use a very simple, no-nonsense
structure and style that has been in use for 20+ years. There is no need to keep
tweaking and fondling it because it serves its purpose. 

Andrew Plato 

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Order RoboHelp X3 in November and receive $100 mail in rebate, FREE WebHelp
Merge Module and the new RoboPDF - add powerful PDF output functionality
to RoboHelp X3. Order online today 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.