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.
Let's see some of this writing (limited sampling has got to be OK in an
academic context)
or please provide a URL to the web site. I'd like to see the doc and
know the company.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: D. Margulis [SMTP:ampersandvirgule -at- WORLDNET -dot- ATT -dot- NET]
> Sent: Thursday, July 02, 1998 4:38 PM
> To: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
> Subject: Workpersonship
>
> <indignation>Today I watched two system architects--make that two very
> bright system architects (estimated median IQ of 150)--struggle
> through
> the directions for using a feature of some software they had just
> installed.
>
> The software in question helps track software requirements and it
> comes
> from a well-known, highly regarded provider of development tools.
>
> I asked to see a copy of what they were having so much trouble with,
> and
> I have that copy in front of me now. The instructions, which are
> posted
> on a support page on the company's website, do not match the help text
> that ships with the software. I presume that the help text is in error
> and that the technical note on the website is a correction, although
> it
> does not say so.
>
> The most charitable thing I can say about the page is that the
> disclaimer at the bottom is the clearest text on the page. It says (in
> all caps, which I will refrain from duplicating here), "Information
> provided in this document and any software that may accompany this
> document (collectively referred to as a Technical Note) is provided
> 'as
> is' without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied..."
>
> Good thing!
>
> The instructions themselves are full of typos, punctuation and
> spelling
> errors, inconsistencies in person, instructions out of sequence,
> inconsistent usage of typographic styles, inconsistent use of
> numbering,
> and a general lack of organization. I'm not picking nits here. Anyone
> can have a senior moment and get an apostrophe or a comma wrong. And
> yes, sometimes the proofreader misses it, too, if you're lucky enough
> to
> have a proofreader. What I'm looking at is simply unintelligible as a
> procedural instruction, regardless of reading level or your opinion on
> the importance of following the conventional rules of orthography,
> punctuation, and style.
>
> Harrumph!
>
> I would not presume to suggest that any sort of credential
> automatically
> qualifies a person as a tech writer. For all I know the writer of this
> tripe has a Master's degree and is an officer of an STC chapter. (Then
> again, maybe the tech writer was out sick that day and the page was
> put
> up by a developer.) But something has to change if we're going to
> engender a warmer reception when we first walk up to a developer and
> say, "Hi, I'm a tech writer, and I'm here to help."</indignation>
>
> Dick Margulis
>
> &^~~~
> Send commands to listserv -at- listserv -dot- okstate -dot- edu (e.g., SIGNOFF
> TECHWR-L)
> Find TECHWR-L-related books at
>http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/books.htm
>
