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.
Re: Culture, or What it means to be a Technical Writer
Subject:Re: Culture, or What it means to be a Technical Writer From:Bill Swallow <bill_swallow -at- ROCKETMAIL -dot- COM> Date:Fri, 8 May 1998 08:33:36 -0700
> User documentation is the whole package, not just the written word,
and
> everything you listed is part of the "translation" process, in my
mind.
> You can't "translate" something if the end result isn't understood by
> the person you are translating for. User analysis, selection of fonts,
> style, graphics, terminology, layout, binding, etc., all have to do
with
> how useful the end product is to the user.
So then what I think I'm hearing is that we are now having the same
problems defining "translation" as we are with "technical writer".
So, where do we go from here? Do we continue to analyze and
over-analyze until we're all blue in the face and sore in the fingers?
I forget who said this, but kudos to him/her... "I explain to people
what I do instead of telling them my title."
Well, now back to my tech writing/translation/information design and
management/and so on.
