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.
Re: Structure and substance: stability and flexibility
Subject:Re: Structure and substance: stability and flexibility From:Andrew Plato <intrepid_es -at- yahoo -dot- com> To:Techwrl-l <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Tue, 13 Jun 2000 08:36:34 -0700 (PDT)
Carnall, Jane wrote ...
> Now, if we could all just agree to ignore AP when he starts shouting that we
> DON'T NEED PROCESSES, we might actually have a good argument/discussion
> about how we can achieve that.
You clearly have not read my posts completely.
I never said I don't use processes and do everything in chaos. You're
type-casting my argument just to make your own point.
My argument is: Content is more important than process. Extensive process and
procedure and the expense of knowledgeable writers is wasteful.
YES! I use processes, systems, and structure - but NEVER at the expense of the
topic.
