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: Not allowed to change templates? From:Karen Kay <karen -at- WORDWRITE -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 5 May 1998 21:38:47 -0700
Tracy,
What you're setting up is a conversion nightmare! When you change
templates, or move to SGML, or change to Word, or change to the Next
Hot Tool, you will have to hand-tweak 15% of your doc set. (10%
because writers deliberately made new tags, +/- 5% for general
misapplication of the template--we are all human.)
I don't feel passionately about many things in technical writing, but
having been through conversions big and small, this is something I
feel quite strongly about. You are creating trouble for yourself and
anyone who inherits your docs down the line.
I do think that a template review board (composed of writers) is the
way to go. Automated conversions r3Wl, but they aren't possible if
writers don't follow the template.
Karen
karen -at- wordwrite -dot- com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tracy Shelby said:
> I think a lot of people are missing the point. The originator of the
> question does not want a new tag because of personal formatting
> preference, but because there is information that needs to be displayed
> that does not fit the mold, so to speak. I, too, worked at a company
> that had tight reigns on the templates, and ever so often I came across
> information that just didn't fit into the formats. When I first started,
> I just did the best I could, using the available formats (this means
> that the information was not displayed as effectively as it could have
> been). Then I discovered that the other writers in the department were
> creating formats when it was required, so started to do the same thing.
> So the collection of guides for the department varied by 5%-10% in
> formatting, the basic formats were the same. None of us were creating
> square bullets when the template had round, that would have been a real
> breech of the template. I'm with the other writers who suggest that you
> go ahead and create the format and ask for forgiveness later. My
> experience is that a new format is not even given a second glance and
> that nobody will notice.
