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.
Subject:Re[2]: Are these words being used? From:"Teresa Wittel" <teresa -dot- wittel -at- microchip -dot- com> To:"TECHWR-L -at- LISTS -dot- RAYCOMM -dot- COM" <TECHWR-L -at- LISTS -dot- RAYCOMM -dot- COM>, "tonymar -at- hotmail -dot- com" <tonymar -at- hotmail -dot- com> Date:Tue, 09 Nov 1999 14:03 -0700
Tony Markatos said:
It has been my experience (Tech Writer, QA Analyst, and Systems
Analyst, Development Project Leader) that, except for simple products,
it is impossible to "clearly translate what the SME says" without a
in-depth understanding of the of the product.
Teresa Wittel responds:
I agree!
However, in some environments "clearly translate" is very ambiguous.
An in-depth understanding is not expected; they only require a surface
familiarity with the product. Speed and a good template are the only
criteria. If it is on paper <or file>, it is "good enough"! Trust me,
I've seen it happen -- I even had to do it. (I've also had to fix
some!) I'm just saying it is a reality and it pays the rent!
At any rate, you develop strategies to survive and write good stuff in
that environment, just as you do anywhere. Those writers have valid
things to say -- even if it sometimes conflicts with the advice given
out by those with the time and resources to "do it right".
So, although we sometimes give out conflicting info, most of it is
valid somewhere. I was just attempting to point that out.
