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.
I'd like to suggest that the disagreement here might be avoided by
substituting the word "comprehensive" for the word "accurate".
This is saying what others have said in a slightly different way. The
information in the manual must always be accurate. Otherwise, what's the
point? How comprehensive the information is depends on who's reading it and
what they're reading it for.
Users don't care how the system works. Users want to know how to do their
jobs with the system. The information you give them should be relevant to
that desire. There may be lots more you could tell them, but they don't
need to know it to do their jobs. So long as what you do include is on the
money, then leaving out the extra stuff is not inaccurate. Being selective
is not being inaccurate.
Jim Cort
Technical Writer
Totaltel
Jcort -at- totaltel -dot- com <mailto:Jcort -at- totaltel -dot- com>
