Comments on: Technical Writing Today http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/11/19/technical-writing-today/ Men's Rights Activism, MRA Politics, Analysis, Commentary and Global News Sun, 08 Nov 2009 17:28:59 -1000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Mike Unwalla, TechScribe http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/11/19/technical-writing-today/comment-page-1/#comment-56984 Mike Unwalla, TechScribe Tue, 01 Jan 2008 13:26:21 +0000 http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/11/19/technical-writing-today/#comment-56984 The literary skills that one learns through a liberal arts education are a world apart from the skills that one needs as a technical writer. Take it as given that a technical writer can use language correctly. Writing ability is a tiny part of the skill set of a technical writer (or technical communicator, if you prefer the modern terminology). A technical document should be an engineered artefact. Think structured authoring, from top to bottom. Use a controlled language and validation tools to ensure conformance to specification. (A controlled language restricts the grammatical structures and the words that a document can contain.) Certainly, for some forms of user documentation, you may want to allow a little literary creativity. But don’t do that if you write the operating instructions for a nuclear power station. The literary skills that one learns through a liberal arts education are a world apart from the skills that one needs as a technical writer. Take it as given that a technical writer can use language correctly. Writing ability is a tiny part of the skill set of a technical writer (or technical communicator, if you prefer the modern terminology).

A technical document should be an engineered artefact. Think structured authoring, from top to bottom. Use a controlled language and validation tools to ensure conformance to specification. (A controlled language restricts the grammatical structures and the words that a document can contain.)

Certainly, for some forms of user documentation, you may want to allow a little literary creativity. But don’t do that if you write the operating instructions for a nuclear power station.

]]> By: ahood50 http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/11/19/technical-writing-today/comment-page-1/#comment-56953 ahood50 Mon, 31 Dec 2007 20:38:48 +0000 http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/11/19/technical-writing-today/#comment-56953 While Chip is a great guy, a wonderful technical communicator, and a past president of the Atlanta chapter of STC, he is not the current president. Al Hood is the current chapter president. Just a slight clarification. While Chip is a great guy, a wonderful technical communicator, and a past president of the Atlanta chapter of STC, he is not the current president. Al Hood is the current chapter president. Just a slight clarification.

]]> By: Roger F. Gay http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/11/19/technical-writing-today/comment-page-1/#comment-54937 Roger F. Gay Tue, 20 Nov 2007 15:36:01 +0000 http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/11/19/technical-writing-today/#comment-54937 Yep. They're like gold in my opinion, if they're good that is. I've stumbled through more than enough technical documentation written by engineers who haven't put much time in on improving their writing skills. After all, you're normally either working our tail off to be good at one or the other. It's a rare breed of people who can do well at both. I'd say making technical things simple is only part of it. Engineers also need to read technical information, tutorials, etc. all the time. Of course, they are capable of getting through material that isn't dirt simple - it can be pretty complicated. But there's a big difference between material that's written well and material that is not written well; and companies underestimate the cost difference. Much of the time, technical people have to go through a long process of trial and error - experimental - learning. It's not because they can't read; it's because whoever wrote the only available documentation couldn't write. It takes a lot of time, and usually means that engineers launch into things knowing less than they could if information was available in a convinient and comprehensible package. Yep. They’re like gold in my opinion, if they’re good that is. I’ve stumbled through more than enough technical documentation written by engineers who haven’t put much time in on improving their writing skills. After all, you’re normally either working our tail off to be good at one or the other. It’s a rare breed of people who can do well at both. I’d say making technical things simple is only part of it. Engineers also need to read technical information, tutorials, etc. all the time. Of course, they are capable of getting through material that isn’t dirt simple – it can be pretty complicated. But there’s a big difference between material that’s written well and material that is not written well; and companies underestimate the cost difference. Much of the time, technical people have to go through a long process of trial and error – experimental – learning. It’s not because they can’t read; it’s because whoever wrote the only available documentation couldn’t write. It takes a lot of time, and usually means that engineers launch into things knowing less than they could if information was available in a convinient and comprehensible package.

]]>