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.
Re: Proof that content is more important than style
Subject:Re: Proof that content is more important than style From:"U-MIRKWOOD\\Gregory Holmes" <holmegm -at- attbi -dot- com> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Sun, 17 Nov 2002 19:03:40 -0500
Andrew Plato <gilliankitty -at- yahoo -dot- com> wrote:
>
> 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.
I would expect that when technical writers get together, literally
or in publications, etc., they discuss things they have in common.
Aside from a little chit-chat, it wouldn't make much sense to
discuss how often to lubricate conveyors, which screen is used to
receipt child support payments, and why your VCR can't be used to
make copies. Content varies so much that beyond generic
discussion of how to learn it, get it from SMEs (gasp!), structure
it, and present it, there wouldn't be much to talk about. It is
an artifact of the situation, not an absolute depiction of how a
writer spends his time and effort.
> 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.
If there had to be a choice between the two, sure. Perhaps we'd
have both?
> 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.
They do, but how much of that is because of the audience? A
person programming an email system (say) is going to approach the
RFCs in a different way than, say, a telephone support person in
an insurance company approaches the online Help to their in-house
software. If "Help" opens an Explorer window with your directory
full of text files, they'll say to hell with it and call their
Help desk. Time and money lost.
Greg Holmes
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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.
