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 have to agree with John Posada on this one. Expecting
>> someone to remember the intimate details of an application
>> they wrote about 5 or 6 years ago is a rediculous expectation.
>If they just cut and pasted information from an SME, then yes. But if they
took
>the time to learn the product/technology, then it isn't outlandish to
expect them
>to have a working knowledge of the technology.
If I have a document in the portfolio and you want to know if I know the
technology, then discussing the technology is fine. However, what good does
that do from the perspective of the document and proving I wrote that
document. That's like saying I wrote a document on configuring a Cisco
router and then when asked about the document, explaining what a router does
in conceptual terms. That'd be fine if I'd written a white paper. However, I
thought I'm being queried on the document in hand...and that doesn't make
sense.
>> Let me ask, what were the dlls for the application you were
>> working on five years ago? What were the system requirements?
>> Rattle it off the top of your head, don't look at your portfolio.
>> Can you do it? If you can, then you've got a good memory.
>> If you can't, you're just human. :-)
>I documented protocol analyzers in 1996. I could tell you with grotesque
detail
>how a protocol analyzer works with no trouble whatsoever.
A protocol analyzer is not a dll. You're switching apples with oranges.
Answering how a protocol analyzer works and "tell me about the AirLink
Security packet types for the AirLink CDPD Protocol Analyzer" are different
things.
Back to the dll...would you, or should you be expected to go into "grotesque
detail" about that dll, of which there might have been 50 or 60 for that
product, if the document in the portfolio is about that dll. I'm not asking
if you could discuss what dlls do,...but "Andrew...I have a dll called
QT4bc.dll that you documented in '97. Tell me about it in 'grotesque
detail'".
>> Sure, it's important that you can provide a summary of what
>> the product does. Sure, you should go through your portfolio
>> and familiarize yourself with what's there. Sure, you should
>> limit your portfolio to a few really good pieces, that way you
>> can actually keep track of what's in it. But you shouldn't
>> have to remember every detail of something you did 5 years ago.
>
>You're getting hung up on the "every detail" thing Sean. I never said you
had to
>know every detail. I said you should be able to demonstrate working
knowledge of
>the technology. This is especially true on material in a portfolio -
material
>you're showing off as your best work.
>the time to learn the product/technology, then it isn't outlandish to
expect them
>to have a working knowledge of the technology.
There is a difference between product and technology...If the product IS a
dll, then discussing the technology would be sidestepping the issue of
whether you wrote the product's document and remembering the details of a
dll 6 years later is absurd.
John Posada
Senior Technical Writer
Barnes&Noble.com
jposada -at- book -dot- com
212-414-6656
"Be accurate...the 4am wakeup call you prevent could be your manager's"
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Buy ComponentOne Doc-To-Help 6.0, the most powerful SINGLE SOURCE HELP
AUTHORING TOOL for MS Word. SAVE $100 on the full version and $50 on the
upgrade. Offer ends 10/31/2002 (code: DTH102250). http://www.componentone.com/d2hlist1002
All-new RoboHelp X3 is now shipping! Get single sourcing, print-quality
documentation, conditional text and much more, in the most monumental
release ever. Save $100! Order online at http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
