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: A tech editor seeks advice on which style guide to adopt
Subject:Re: A tech editor seeks advice on which style guide to adopt From:praneeta p <praneeta_paradkar -at- yahoo -dot- com> To:TECHWR-L -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com Date:Thu, 24 Sep 2009 17:01:01 +0530 (IST)
Hi All,
Â
So here's aÂStyle Guide comparison matrix that I developed after having read numerous e-mails, forums, and counsel from ex-colleagues. I also take this opportunity to thank all those who wrote back on the topic. Your inputs were valuable. Thanks again.
Â
Needless to say: my verdict is in favor of Sun's Read Me First. Having undergone so much pain to come to this decision, I have been told that Oracle is buying out Sun. What, pray tell me, is the fate of the Sun's Style Guide???Â
Â
Â
Style Guide Analysis
Â
Parameters:
1.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Depth of topics
2.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Breadth of topics
3.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Special treatment of topics of interest â such as screen elements, writing for a global audience.
4.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Examples & rationale
5.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Tone and flexibility (degree of specificity)
6.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Ease of reference
7.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Availability
Â
Â
Style Guide
Strengths
Weaknesses
Â
MSTP
1. Most topics are detailed. Scores a 4/5 on depth and breadth (flip-side).
2.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Examples are good with correct and incorrect usage clearly delineated.
3.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Screen terminology treatment is detailed.
4.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ MS products are used world-wide and most people are familiar with their word usage, terminology, and documentation style (which does not in any way mean that MSTP is the absolute in the computer world.) But then users are happy!
5.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Up-side to being inflexible is lesser ambiguity and lesser debates.
6.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Online version relatively easier to reference.
Â
1.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Rationale at times is ambiguous.
2.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Tone is many times dictatorial than suggestive (up-side).
3.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Examples, at times, cannot be extrapolated to our situation.
4.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Heavy focus on usage dictionary and less on writing guidelines.
5.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Punctuation section is too detailed for end-user documentation.
6.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Heavily centered on MS Windows (obviously!), but there is an up-side to this (see strengths).
7.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Only purchased copies available. Free versions are outdated.
8.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Flip-side of being too detailed is that the conventions are sometimes difficult to remember or recollect.
9.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ No guidelines on constructing a glossary or scripting glossary terms.
10.ÂÂÂ Printed version â difficult to reference.
Â
Sunâs Read Me First
Rationale is crisp.
Size is manageable and compact.
Healthy dose of writing style, mechanics, constructing sentences and mechanics without overkill.
Tone provides leeway and is flexible.
Some sections have received outstanding treatment:
Common redundancies and alternatives
GUI Verbs
Questionable terms and their alternatives.
Better than MSTP for client server as well as web-based applications.
7.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Section on Punctuation is nice and crisp.
8.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Chapter on Glossary and Indexing are detailed.
9.ÂÂÂÂÂÂ Chapter on Writing for an International Audience has concrete dos and donâts and examples.
10.ÂÂÂ Third edition has newer sections on:
Anthropomorphisms to Avoid
Idioms and Colloquialisms to Avoid
Phrasal Verbs to Avoid and Their Alternatives
The fourth edition has improved chapters on:
Writing For An International Audience
Writing about GUIs
Working with Technical Illustrations
Guidelines for easing translation of documents.
Â
Scores 3/5 for depth and breadth.
Screen terminology has not been discussed in detail (the 4th edition promises to take care of this).
Less detailed on usage dictionary.
Â
IBM Style Guide
Compact, but at the cost of useful discussion.
Â
Free!!!
Heavily based on the Chicago manual of Style.
Apple Style Guide
More or less similar to IBMâs.
Heavily based on the Chicago manual of Style.
Chicago Manual of Style
Considered a bible by American publishing houses
Is a general style guide used in mainstream publishing, not for software/computer terminology.
Example: It directs you to put periods and commas inside quotation marks. However, if you use quotation marks to enclose commands that users enter on their computer keyboards, that rule would create problems: normally, the user should not end a keyboard command with a period or comma even though the format seems to require it:
Type "delete myfile.doc." > Type "delete myfile.doc".
Â
The AP Stylebook
None (as compared to Chicago or others). At par with CMS though less detailed.
Contradicts some well known tenets such as the serial comma. Sun & MSTP both recommend a serial comma, AP advises against it.
Good for academic and trade journals, not relevant to software/computers.
Â
--- On Wed, 23/9/09, praneeta p <praneeta_paradkar -at- yahoo -dot- com> wrote:
From: praneeta p <praneeta_paradkar -at- yahoo -dot- com>
Subject: A tech editor seeks advice on which style guide to adopt
To: TECHWR-L -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Date: Wednesday, 23 September, 2009, 2:59 PM
Hi All,
Â
Recently, in one of our doc team meetings, my manager asked me to come to a formal decision on which style guide we should adopt as the bible for our team. And as it goes with managers, I have to justify my decision.
Â
So far, the writers have been using MSTP (Microsoft Style for Technical Publications) for two reasons:
Â
1. It is easily available.
2. and free.
Â
I rather like Sun's Read Me First. The rationale appeals to me. The recommendations in their sound like recommendations and are less dictatorial than the MSTP.
Â
I would like to know which style guide would be best for web-based applications?
Â
Is MSTP really only for Windows-based apps or can it be adopted for web-based apps too?
Â
Which style guide (Sun's or MSTP) is likely toÂbe adopted easily by the writers? That is not to say that I will take the path of least resistance if one or the other wins in merit versus ease of adoption.
Â
Kindly advise.
Best always,
Â
Praneeta Paradkar
Â
Yahoo! India has a new look. Take a sneak peek.
From: praneeta p <praneeta_paradkar -at- yahoo -dot- com>
Subject: A tech editor seeks advice on which style guide to adopt
To: TECHWR-L -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Date: Wednesday, 23 September, 2009, 2:59 PM
Hi All,
Â
Recently, in one of our doc team meetings, my manager asked me to come to a formal decision on which style guide we should adopt as the bible for our team. And as it goes with managers, I have to justify my decision.
Â
So far, the writers have been using MSTP (Microsoft Style for Technical Publications) for two reasons:
Â
1. It is easily available.
2. and free.
Â
I rather like Sun's Read Me First. The rationale appeals to me. The recommendations in their sound like recommendations and are less dictatorial than the MSTP.
Â
I would like to know which style guide would be best for web-based applications?
Â
Is MSTP really only for Windows-based apps or can it be adopted for web-based apps too?
Â
Which style guide (Sun's or MSTP) is likely toÂbe adopted easily by the writers? That is not to say that I will take the path of least resistance if one or the other wins in merit versus ease of adoption.
Â
Kindly advise.
Best always,
Â
Praneeta Paradkar
Â
Yahoo! India has a new look. Take a sneak peek.
Add whatever you love to the Yahoo! India homepage. Try now! http://in.yahoo.com/trynew
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Free Software Documentation Project Web Cast: Covers developing Table of
Contents, Context IDs, and Index, as well as Doc-To-Help
2009 tips, tricks, and best practices. http://www.doctohelp.com/SuperPages/Webcasts/
Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for individual
authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface. Write
once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and version control! http://www.helpandmanual.com/
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
