Review comments

[Fred M Jacobson <fred -at- BOOLE -dot- COM>]

Greetings-

The descriptions of writers reactions to review comments makes me
think of an issue that really falls under our earlier discussion
of working conditions.  I always try to set up reviews as
_technical_ reviews.  In the review cover letter, I emphasize that
it is the responsibility of the reviewer to correct errors of fact
and call attention to problems of clarity and presentation.  The
implied message (which should have been an explicit part of the
writer's and content expert's job descriptions or some other formal
or informal definition of their working relationship) is that it is
_my_ responsibility to present the material clearly and appropriately
(for the audience).  I expect to be treated as a professional with
skills and responsibilities.  I try to treat the content experts the
same (although I am capable of finding technical errors and I do
sometimes).  Because most people we work with write, they think of
themselves as writers.  There are always at least a few who can write
at a professional level, and I gladly accept any editorial advice from
them.  But there are often a few or more who think they are top-notch
editors or have very strong ideas about presentation and who make
suggestions (or even demands) that are wrong or at least against the
standards I am using.  Remember the client's editor who put in the
colons in the wrong places and the boss who suggested (or insisted)
that a manual be rewritten in the passive voice.  I have never been
is such bad situations.  I always try to establish my credentials,
responsibility, and authority and make sure I have people in the
organization who will back me up.  (One more thing: I always admit
when I'm wrong and give in when it doesn't really matter.)

-Fred
--
INTERNET: fred -at- boole -dot- com          PHONE: (408) 526-3292  FAX: (408) 526-3055
USPS: Fred Jacobson / Boole & Babbage / 3131 Zanker Road / San Jose CA 95134