SUMMARY: When do editors get credit?

[Rowena Hart <rhart -at- INTRINSYC -dot- COM>]

I think I may have deleted a couple of responses, but here's the
best of the responses to my question "When do editors get
credit as authors?" --

From Suzanne G. -
If you are writing the document, then you, and only you, are the author.

Even if a developer gives me a well written functional spec to start
from, I never use their text and I certainly wouldn't consider them the
author.

From Michelle C. -
If you are lucky enough to have names listed on the technical
documents you publish, then I think all authors should be listed. If they
don't want to list you as "co-author" then they should list you as
"editor."

I strongly disagree that editors should just merely defer to the
technical expert because he or she provided the technical content. If the
book is going to be useful or successful, and therefore help the product
be successful, then the programmer could not have done it without the
writer.

From John P. -
To be honest, I cannot ever remember getting any credit for any
documentation and it doesn't bother me. Besides...I usualy get paid more
than they do, so it balances out.  They get the credit and I get the
cash, and everyone knows that cash is always better than credit.

Besides...I'd worry more if the developer didn't want the credit. Think
of it as as compliment that they want their name attributed to your
work.

From David L. -
I'm surprised ANYONE gets their name on the book. Most
companies I've been with have been paranoid about having names
of personnel in the manuals. Being proud of my work I had to figure
out an undetectable way to sign it. My books contained some very
strange user names (anagrams) and lists (acrostics).

The developer can sign the program with an Easter eggs. If you wrote
the manual, the name on it should be yours. Maybe you should
demand to put your name on their program.

From Howard -

Much documentation I've come across doesn't list writers or
editors! Personally I like to look and see just who did or didn't
write things, so if you've put a lot of work into writing, and, you've
been project editor - well heck! How much toner will it take to
reflect this by inclusion in both lists?

Otherwise, I'd accept a certain amount of writing as part of the
editor's job and just include yourself there (this assumes some, but
not overmuch, writing).

In the context of an article (journal? in-house magazine?) well,
perhaps you're over-editing! Maybe it would be a case of just marking
up the copy with comments such as "you're the author, this don't
make sense - rewrite it, I'll give you advice if you come see me
about it".

I got the impression that a journal paper should reflect someone's
own work - including the writing. This could be an overstatement as
applied to non-native speakers by their tutors "Look, we can't rewrite
it for you - you're supposed to able to write in English, that's the whole
point!" and a certain amount of editing don't go amiss, but if you really
are writing such a high proportion, you should get some recognitio
 for it to my mind.

From Bruce A. -

An Editor edits the work and has the author rewrite it.

If the Editor rewrites a substantial amount including layouts,
graphics etc  WITH the original authors agreement, or by
standard procedure etc, then the  Editor is no longer the Editor
but is a co-author.

The percentage written by both, determines whose name
appears first in any  credits.

A warning though.

As a TW, I would be deeply offended if I'd spent 3 months
creating a  document with all the graphics, layouts etc etc and
then had an Editor rewrite a portion of the text etc and then put
their name on the document as co-author.

Anyone can alter something done by someone else. This is not
being a  co-author. This is being a typical Editor 'determined' to
put their own  stamp on the document.

- 50 -


 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=