The Real Offense

[Barbara Hubert <barbara_hubert -at- epicdata -dot- com>]

my 2 bits,


Andrew says:

     I admit that I am a harsh critic of the theory-crap that a lot
     of writers do. I
     also admit to over-generalizing many writers as deliberately
     trying to do this.

     However, I feel this is a fundamental flaw in the entire tech
     writing
     profession. One that is dramatically hurting the profession in
     ways most people
     do not ever address.

I find that I rely heavily on analysis and methods learned in
post-secondary, but  real world writing forces those skills to
function in the background (kind of like metadata on a network). The
reality of high tech is that there are a a plethora of

reasons methods don't work (not just in writing, but in lots of other
areas too, such as product or network
implementation).

Methodologies:

          tend to be linear
          usually show activities as only occurring once (I revise my
docs recursively and constantly)
          are often prescriptive
          usually don't distinguish between size or complexity of doc
suite
          often mix various project elements that should be kept
separate, such as project management,
          design, development (ie waterfall design is not an
implementation methodology)
          don't distinguish between operation/functional and conceptual
approaches.

All the above concerns aside, I would never consider banging out a
document until I had figured out:

          who the audience is
          how the doc will be used
          what are the goals of the doc
          the physical environment where the doc will be used
          everything and more about the technology
          write the damn doc (i realize this list is not parallel)

IMHO that's a method

From the responses to this original post, it seems that there are some
decisively divided camps on this issue.....
personally, I find myself torn between the two stances, which seem to
pit methodology against technology. I think both
are necessary, though I agree 100% with Andrew when he says:

     For example - I think ALL tech writers in the computer
     industry should be
     forced at gunpoint to take a C++ and SQL class (or something
     similar). Writers
     who know how programs are written and databases are used are
     1000 times more
     qualified to write about those things.

     Mostly, I find it appalling that some writers will go to
     extensive rhetorical
     lengths to defend their ignorance as if they have a right to
     be paid and
     admired for stupidity.