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.
Thanks for taking the time to clarify. Someone off-list filled me in
on this missing piece as well. It all comes down to context, doesn't
it? (And not alone in help!) I figured I might well be missing
information, since I don't have a good grasp of the underlying
technologies for online help. I've written it, I edit it, but I've
never had to do anything more than follow simple instructions,
already in place, for building it.
But if I, in my ignorance, had posted what I thought to be a clear
and complete question, I would have been mortified by a response that
seemed only to cut me. And I would likely be timid about seeking
advice on that list again. (No loss to the list, perhaps, but I
would have been left with the wrong impression of the community.) In
posting a question, if ever I left out pertinent details, it would
not be deliberate, but would point to some lapse in my thinking at
that moment or to some deficiency in my own understanding of the
issue. I would always intend to supply the necessary context. I
would assume the same in others.
However, none of this is to argue for prolonging the conversation on
this point. Clearly, those who understood the nature of the
necessary information omitted in the original question and those who
knew the original responder understood the situation differently. I
am glad to have my own understanding corrected, and I am glad to have
learned a little about the mysteries of help technologies.
And, in the interests of full disclosure, I should note that in a
prolonged debate, I am not above becoming heated, particularly on
issues I've given a good deal of thought to over the years. So, I'm
no saint. And I wouldn't want anyone to interpret my response here
as a claim that I am ever and always even-tempered, regardless of
circumstance. (But I generally have to work up to becoming testy . .
. . :)
Odile,
hearing nothing but thoughtful responses, feeling nothing but perfect
equanimity . . . lest anyone (since I am a near-unknown on the list)
wonder
At 11:16 AM -0400 9/23/05, Char James-Tanny wrote:
Hi, Odile :-)
I thought Bill's post was abrupt, but not rude. The missing piece is
*which* Help format she is publishing (as other posts have shown),
because the context-sensitive connection is different if you are
producing WinHelp, HTML Help, WebHelp, JavaHelp, Oracle Help, or
FlashHelp. All are viable outputs from RoboHelp. (And, if she's using
RoboHelp HTML, remove WinHelp from that list.)
I actually understood Bill's response better than I understood the
original question.
<snip -- list manager says I cannot quote the entire message>
Now Shipping -- WebWorks ePublisher Pro for Word! Easily create online
Help. And online anything else. Redesigned interface with a new
project-based workflow. Try it today! http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l
Doc-To-Help 2005 converts RoboHelp files with one click. Author with Word or any HTML editor. Visit our site to see a conversion demo movie and learn more. http://www.componentone.com/TECHWRL/DocToHelp2005
---
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.
