Re: PHD in Tech writing

["Chuck Martin" <cm -at- writeforyou -dot- com>]

"John Posada" <JPosada -at- book -dot- com> wrote in message news:212263 -at- techwr-l -dot-  -dot-  -dot- 
>
> > was optional. I did say that one of the most valuable
> > qualities in a writer is the ability to defend a
> > writing decision, and that a
>
> Andrea...having knowledge and skill of the subject means you won't HAVE to
> defend a writing decision. I've never had to defend something I wrote. Why
> should I? I don't make developers defend their code.
>
No matter how good you are, a clueless PHB (pointy-haired boss) or
self-absorbed programmer or (fill in the blank here) *will* challenge what
you've produced. You won't be able to respond by saying "it's good because I
know it's good and I know what I'm doing," even if it is and you do--and no
matter how well you know the subject you're writing about.

And I *have* made developers defend their code and their coding decisions.
I've learned not only about writing and information and organizing and so
many of the things associated with the "writing" side of technical writing
(although not at the post-grad level), I've also immersed myself and
educated myself about the "technical" side. Often I can tell when a
programmer has taken shortcuts. I can semi-read code in some languages and
get a good idea of what's going on behind the scenes, and sometimes provide
feedback, suggestions for changes (that sometimes are accepted, sometimes
are countered for various reasons, and sometimes are simply blown off), or
ideas for different approaches. Certainly I've challenged design decisions
when they make users work harder, and expecially when they violate common
and accepted standards.

Both types of writing, English and code (just other languages) *should* be
challenged, by both peers and by others on the team. It's a critical way to
get more sets of eyes on what's produced and get a better product to the
user.

Chuck Martin