Re: word processing or DTP

[Bernie McCann <BernieMc -at- AOL -dot- COM>]

Hi Becky;

It's wonderful to have you contributing in the great DEBATE, but ....

In a message dated 98-07-23 13:55:50 EDT, you write:

<<
 It is VERY frustrating to be the "owner" of a project, but to only be
 allowed to "write", not format, not edit, etc. IMO a good writer does
 all of these WHILE he/she writes.
Generally speaking (we must) I have to question your statement that the writer
is the "owner" of a project.  It has rarely been the case in my experience -
even though I've known many writers of technical documentation that thought
that way.  In fact, never has a document of mine been produced without
independent editing and (note) the editor having the final decision (I think
that any skilled professional editor straying into this newsgroup will know
what I mean).  Before you react, let me advise you that the "final decision"
could, actually, be identical to yours.  Also, remember, an editor is not a
proof-reader (I'm sure that you are already aware of this).

I am reminded of the quotation of Sir James M. Barrie:
"For several days after my first book was published I carried it in my pocket,
and took surreptitious peeps at it to make sure the ink had not faded."

 My company has formatters, graphic
 artists, and editors. Formatters can really help when projects pile up
 and you have rough source from engineers that must be formatted. The
 formatter can do this while you are at work on other projects; this is
 efficient.
Intentional or not, these staff seem to be decribed in the same way as we,
once, refered to the typist's pool.  They should all be highly educated, and
very skilled in their tasks.

When this topic self-destructs (as already stated) it seems to me that another
Debate could discuss job descriptions (?).

Our illustrations are
 extremely detailed, so in our case, we definitely need their expertise.
 But, I often correct illustrations without going back to the graphic
 artists who are usually up to their ears in new work anyway. This too
 is efficient (IMO).
"often", "without".  This paragraph just cries out to be read on a technical
illustrators or publications' managers newsgroup (IMO).

 The idea that a writer just writes the document and then
 gives control of it to a formatter
 (a highly skilled dtp computer operator who reports to a project leader, who
will assume full control, I think)
 for however long it might take, etc.
 seems really nonprogressive to me... snip, snip ....

 Sometimes a writer is just a source gatherer, but this is not noticed
 in an environment that allows such compartmentalizing. This source
 gatherer slaps all kinds of information in a document then throws it
 over the fence to the formatters and editors to "write" because
 the source gatherer is either too lazy to do the work, doesn't know
 how to do the work, or just thinks he/she is "above" doing it.
 If you think I know someone like that, you're right.
To win the debate, you must be fair.  Nobody will disagree with you about the
"source gatherer" that you describe.  Anyone like this must be repremanded
immediately.  I don't think it works whatever our individual policy
preferences are.

Personaly, like most people (the debate is very interesting off-list) I am
sitting on the fence.  As I've said before, I will defend to the death your
right to improve your skills, and if you accept that related skills must be
desired and not mandatory, then you accept that there will be some people who
may not have your skills, but contribute successfully.

If the country's greatest technical writer can only use a typewriter, I'll
hire him/her.

Bernie