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: Placement of cautions in procedures From:eric -dot- dunn -at- ca -dot- transport -dot- bombardier -dot- com To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com> Date:Thu, 9 Sep 2004 17:48:00 -0400
bounce-techwr-l-106467 -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com wrote on 09/09/2004 04:57:39 PM:
> Instruction in this case would be irrelevant. There is sufficient
> documentation of regulatory requirements and common industry practice
We're on the same side of the discussion Gene. Only brought up my examples
to highlight the reasons all those regulations and industry practice
evolved the way they did.
I suppose that otherwise, we risk having to fend off arguments to change
D/W/C/N representation by people from fields that don't have to adhere to
strict regulations and guidelines. Have to show how the principles apply
in those situations that are not governed by strict rule and regulation.
Also, it might spread lessons learned to non-regulated fields.
Military and industrial practices and requirements evolved for a reason.
It took something mighty important to get the rule written, so it better
be a MUCH more important reason considered against a FULL understanding of
the requirement that led to the rule in the first place.
The full understanding of the original requirement is key. Considered in
that light, "because it's the way we've always done it" is an acceptable
reason that it should never be changed. Because, considering the
requirements to insert a rule, you can assume that even if you don't know
the original reason, it must have been air tight.
ROBOHELP X5: Featuring Word 2003 support, Content Management, Multi-Author
support, PDF and XML support and much more!
TRY IT TODAY at http://www.macromedia.com/go/techwrl
WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT: New! Document review system for Word and FrameMaker
authors. Automatic browser-based drafts with unlimited reviewers. Full
online discussions -- no Web server needed! http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
