Re: Technical Writing - What's the catch?

[Lou Quillio <quillio -at- gmail -dot- com>]

On Apr 1, 2005 2:06 PM, Dick Margulis <margulisd -at- comcast -dot- net> wrote:

> Yes, you appear to be missing something. Orwell is focusing on what _I_
> (first person, the writer) am trying to say. Tech writers (most of us)
> are focusing first on the expectations of the audience ( = _other_,
> third person). I'm not arguing with Orwell at all; I'm just saying the
> list Brian quoted is focused on _self-expression_ rather than on
> _knowledge transfer._ Different purpose, different list. That's all.

I'll agree to disagree.

When you write for hire, you agree to serve a third party's interests
-- third in the sense that the audience and writer are constants.  You
want to do a good job, which means the task subsumes self-expression
and the canon of clarity advice stands unqualified,

Doubts that writers can compartmentalize are a separate matter.  Some
can, some can't.

Only within private contrivance does Brian's quoted list "focus" on
self-expression alone.  Nice strawman.  No sale.

LQ

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT - EDIT AND REVIEW, REDEFINED
Accelerate the document lifecycle with full online discussions and unique feedback-management capabilities. Unlimited, efficient reviews for Word
and FrameMaker authors. Live, online demo:
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 lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.