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.
----- Original Message -----
From: <eric -dot- dunn -at- ca -dot- transport -dot- bombardier -dot- com>
To: "Bonnie Granat" <bgranat -at- editors-writers -dot- info>
Cc: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Sent: September 17, 2003 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: Refining My "Cutting Edge" Technical Writing Skills Post
>
>
>
> "Bonnie Granat" <bgranat -at- editors-writers -dot- info> wrote on 09/17/2003
> 10:04:03 AM:
> > I'm suggesting that, let's say, three weeks researching
> > for every one week
> > actually creating the documentation is a ratio that might
> > offer another reason
> > for the existence of so much inferior documentation.
>
> Ah, the joy of broad generalised statements and judgements. It's the trap
> TECHWR_L is best at falling into.
>
I'm surprised you saw it as a judgment when the word cues, such as
"suggesting" and "might," were included to indicate otherwise.
> Sure, if you're documenting a toaster the research to content development
> ratio should be much lower. If you're documenting a cutting edge
> electro-hydraulic braking system and computer control interface for urban
> transit vehicles the research to content development ratio might need to
> be much HIGHER. Both ends of the spectrum and there's no generalisation
> that any competent analysis could apply to techwriting as a whole.
>
It seems utterly absurd to say that the time for writing would be reduced with
increased complexity of the content.
> Seems to me no matter what the industry or audience the only
> generalisation that can be made is; Just enough research, with just enough
> content development, with just enough organisation, with just enough
> design, to fulfil just enough of the expectations/requirements and deliver
> in just enough time for barely enough budget to get paid and make just
> enough profit.
>
> Is that saying enough? <lol>
>
No, not quite. <g> The more complex the subject, the more time should be spent
to make sure the documentation makes sense.
> Anything further is tweaking one of the "enough"s into above average,
> noteworthy, or excellent territory. But like the old adage of "good, fast,
> cheap, pick two." each element pulls against others. The value of each
> element is different in different scenarios and industries for different
> audiences. The definition of "enough" is open to widely varying
> interpretation depending on who you talk to.
>
Indeed. I am suggesting that 75/25 gives short shrift to the documentation.
> Knowing the industry might lower your research time. Knowing
> XML/DTP/HTML/SGML/Java/asp might lower your design, organisation, and
> delivery times. Knowing writing might lower your content development and
> organisation times. Which is most important for your situation? Which one
> is your bottleneck? Will savings in one area lead to overall improvements
> in speed, quality, or cost? Or, will savings in one area lead to
> improvements or losses in speed, quality, or cost in another area? Do the
> strengths of one writer in a group complement the strengths of another?
> Do you need the members of the group to be generalists strong in all
> aspects, or will specialising speed up/improve the group? All questions
> that are impossible to answer with a generalisation.
>
My comments were in response to a generalization made by another poster, Eric,
and I still maintain that 75/25 is a bad research/writing ratio.
___________________________
Bonnie Granat
Granat Editorial Services http://www.editors-writers.info
Fast | Accurate | Affordable
NEED TO PUBLISH YOUR FRAMEMAKER CONTENT ONLINE?
?Mustang? (code name) is a NEW online publishing tool for FrameMaker that
lets you easily single-source content to Web, intranets, and online Help.
The interface is designed for FrameMaker users, so there is little or no
learning curve and no macro language required! See a live demo that
will take your breath away: http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l3
---
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.
