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: Non-Technical Editors (was Re: What to look for...)
Subject:RE: Non-Technical Editors (was Re: What to look for...) From:"Robert Plamondon" <robert -at- plamondon -dot- com> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Sun, 18 May 2003 07:52:10 -0700
This brings up a pet observation of mine: "Every time you touch a document,
you damage it." Writing has a lot in common with the surgeon who does a
wonderful job of cutting and stitching, but sometimes leaves sponges and
clamps inside the patients.
The usual pronouncement is, "This is unacceptable. Stop being human this
instant!" But, realistically, a lot of what we do is based on increasing
the odds that the writer's equivalent of sponges and clamps will be removed
before the ether wears off.
Some of these are: having an editor go over your work, having a review,
waiting for copy to get cold and going over it again, comparing your mark-up
to the final version, going back and re-reading the entire paragraph, even
if you've only changed a comma, using the same style sheet over and over so
you get used to it can spot deviations at a glance, and so on.
If you don't understand the copy, you can't detect the collateral damage
caused by your copy-editing. Prudence calls for such editors to act in a
purely advisory role. The edits should be treated as suggestions for the
author to implement if they make sense. If you are a subject matter expert
yourself, then applying edits directly is probably more efficient and should
lead to no more collateral damage than if the author applied them.
Which role to play may (and probably should) vary from document to document
and author to author. The author's preferences should also be taken into
account. Some people hate their old copy and never want to see it again;
others can hardly stand to have other people touch their work. Often they
can be accommodated.
-- Robert
--
Robert Plamondon
President, High-Tech Technical Writing
robert -at- plamondon -dot- com http://www.plamondon.com/HIGHTECH/homepage.html
(541) 453-5841
"We're Looking for a Few Good Clients"
---
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.