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: [RMX:NL] Re: [RMX:NL] Re: Request for comments on my Structured Writing series
Subject:RE: [RMX:NL] Re: [RMX:NL] Re: Request for comments on my Structured Writing series From:Slager Timothy J <Timothy -dot- Slager -at- dematic -dot- com> To:Julie Stickler <jstickler -at- gmail -dot- com>, TECHWR-L Writing <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com> Date:Thu, 19 May 2016 13:42:06 +0000
:)
I sometimes think that the naming is wrong. If every page is page one, then that is unstructured. Linear writing is structured; it can often be made more useful and flexible by breaking it out of that structure.
-----Original Message-----
From: techwr-l-bounces+timothy -dot- slager=dematic -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+timothy -dot- slager=dematic -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On Behalf Of Julie Stickler
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 9:28 AM
To: TECHWR-L Writing
Subject: [RMX:NL] Re: [RMX:NL] Re: Request for comments on my Structured Writing series
If "every page is page one" then it's really ironic to be told that I have to read ten other articles before I get to this one.
Just sayin....
(And yes, I probably should go read those other articles now.)
On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Slager Timothy J < Timothy -dot- Slager -at- dematic -dot- com> wrote:
> I get the feeling that Robert and Julie aren't acknowledging that this
> is chapter 11. If the chapter is taken in isolation, their comments are valid.
> But they seem less valid in the context of the rest of the articles. I
> haven't read all of the articles and it has been awhile since I read
> them, but each chapter builds on or adds to the previous ones.
>
> The newbie picking up this book would have had the benefit of 10
> chapters of very well written explanations about structured writing
> before getting to this chapter. As a long-time technical writer whose
> experience, unfortunately, has mostly been limited to "unstructured"
> writing, I found the articles helpful. Mark explains basic concepts in
> ways that make more sense than most other articles I have read. (Plus,
> his writing is
> exemplary.)
>
> tims
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: techwr-l-bounces+timothy -dot- slager=dematic -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+timothy -dot- slager=dematic -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> ]
> On Behalf Of Julie Stickler
> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 3:30 PM
> To: Robert Lauriston
> Cc: TECHWR-L Writing
> Subject: [RMX:NL] Re: Request for comments on my Structured Writing
> series
>
> Who is the audience for this book, developers? Because I agree with
> Robert, I've been single sourcing via tools for over a decade now, so
> I'm not really all that concerned with the algorithms used to transform my
> source into different media. Your article feels way too technical to me
> (and I'm the sort of nerd who likes getting into the code).
>
> If I were a newbie technical writing picking up this book to learn
> about single sourcing, you would have scared me off entirely with this approach.
> Single sourcing really not all that hard to do (at least it hasn't
> been for me). Especially if you never got too attached to the idea of
> writing linear documents. I was trained to "chunk" right off the bat
> in school, which makes assembly and re-use much easier concepts to
> adopt than if I'd spent decades writing book format manuals.
>
> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Robert Lauriston
> <robert -at- lauriston -dot- com>
> wrote:
>
> > It feels very dated, like it was written in the 90s, when structured
> > writing and single-sourcing were new concepts rather than standard
> > practices embodied in off-the-shelf tools that have been evolving
> > for
> > 20 years.
> >
> > Thus the presentation seems backward to me. We're not starting from
> > zero. People single-source using off-the-shelf tools, in some cases
> > enhanced with custom code that has been in place for a while. Most
> > of us write in a WYSIWYG editor in Flare / FrameMaker/ Oxygen /
> > Confluence / whatever, then generate web help, PDF, static web site
> > pages, etc. from templates. It's interesting to know what's going on
> > under the hood (and essential if you're developing templates or
> > custom code), but starting the piece with such a low-level
> > explanation exaggerates its importance over more crucial
> > considerations, such as total cost of ownership.
> >
> > On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 10:56 AM, <mbaker -at- analecta -dot- com> wrote:
> > > TechWhirl magazine has just published the latest in my series on
> > structured
> > > writing (http://techwhirl.com/single-sourcing-algorithm/), which
> > > is scheduled to become a book from XML Press. A big reason for
> > > serializing
> > the
> > > book on TechWhirl first is to get feedback that will help me
> > > improve the book. I'd be really grateful if anyone who is
> > > interested would be
> > willing to
> > > read the latest article or any others in the series and give me
> > > some feedback, either on the site or to me personally (mbaker at
> > > analecta dot com).
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > Visit TechWhirl for the latest on content technology, content
> > strategy and content development | http://techwhirl.com
> >
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as jstickler -at- gmail -dot- com -dot-
> >
> > To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> > techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> >
> >
> > Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
> > http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources
> > and info.
> >
> > Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our
> > online magazine at http://techwhirl.com
> >
> > Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our
> > public email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Julie Stickler
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Visit TechWhirl for the latest on content technology, content strategy
> and content development | http://techwhirl.com
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as Timothy -dot- Slager -at- dematic -dot- com -dot-
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
>
> Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
>http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources
> and info.
>
> Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our
> online magazine at http://techwhirl.com
>
> Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our
> public email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives
>
--
Julie Stickler
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Visit TechWhirl for the latest on content technology, content strategy and content development | http://techwhirl.com
Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online magazine at http://techwhirl.com
Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Visit TechWhirl for the latest on content technology, content strategy and content development | http://techwhirl.com
