Re: Who dreams up these things?

[Ed Gregory <edgregory -at- home -dot- com>]

Anybody who believes they should be permitted to write technical
documentation because they like to write or because have a B.A. in English
is mistaken. The same is true for the person who believes that becoming a
master of the Clustar method (or any other flavor) makes them the perfect
documentationist.

We can examine great writing and find the patterns that exist within.
However, it is not only those patterns that make the writing good. It is
also the ability of the writer to write. It is not the map that we
remember, but the journey. I'd rather take a few wrong turns while riding
in a Lincoln than get there without a misstep while sitting in the back
seat of a Yugo. 

Sigh. I can almost smell the impending return of the "talent versus
technology" debate that crops up here from time to time.

I believe we need some of each to be effective. How much of each depends on
the skill of the person mixing them.

I also believe that it is far easier to teach method to a good writer than
to teach good writing to a method documentationist. Methods change from
employer to employer, but writing skill is valued by all.

At 07:16 AM 9/28/99 -0500, Tim Altom wrote:
>Well gee, Andrew, Simply Written has been called in lots of times to fix
>manuals that were "just written" too; many of them were meandering
>excercises in amateurism. Somebody thumped his chest and proclaimed himself

Ed Gregory
http://www.members.home.net/edgregory/search1.htm