Re: Not Wanted--Technical Writers

[Nora Merhar <nmerhar -at- CHARLESINDUSTRIES -dot- COM>]

And some would argue that from the examples given, the documentation
does not *appear* to have been improved--although I'm guessing that
some of it was.

Tracy is right--the argument in the article is that *old* TWs with
experience are set in their ways and unable to write documentation
that people will want to use; whereas, the new, young, liberal arts
graduates who have neither technical knowledge nor training in
technical writing (and are not TWs--what did the article call them?)
are *better* at writing for those users. There was a direct attack
upon experienced people, and the implication that all experienced TWs
and people who have technical knowledge are stuck in their ways, not
creative, limited.

Considering the diverse backgrounds on this list, I don't believe that
for a minute.

Nora
nmerhar -at- charlesindustries -dot- com

Donna wrote:

> The fact is, the writers at WandA improved the documentation. That's
what
> technical writers do. Would we be having this discussion if they
were
> 40-something and didn't write poetry?

And Tracy wrote:

> We wouldn't be having this discussion if the article said "these
people
> are technical writers" (which they are) instead of "these people
> improved the documentation written by technical writers."
>

	http://www.documentation.com/, or http://www.dejanews.com/