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.
Subject:Re[2]: More personable tech writing From:Steven Owens <uso01 -at- MAILHOST -dot- UNIDATA -dot- COM> Date:Thu, 18 Nov 1993 09:39:13 -0600
Stephen Bernhardt (sbernhar -at- NMSU -dot- EDU) says:
> Personable may have the wrong connotations for what we are after. We
> know that users can be helped by appropriate governing metaphors that
> help them build an appropriate and useful model of how the system
> works. We also know that scenarios are frequently helpful, especially
> as new users are introduced to ways that features of an application
> might be exploited.
Actually, "personable" has pretty much the connotations I was
after when I started this thread. I wasn't referring to use and
construction of metaphors, nor to use of scenarios, although I find
those topics interesting. I was hoping to take a look at a much
lower-level issue of use of language and word choice, phrasing, and
so forth; the _tone_ of the writing.
I recently read through UNIX System Administration, by David
Fiedler and Bruce H. Hunter. I'd say it's a pretty fair guess that
the authors are NOT technical writers, yet I found the book highly
readable, simply because of the informal style and the fact that the
personality of the authors came through. I feel this encouraged
greater rapport between the authors and their audience (me). I'm
wondering if this principle is applicable elsewhere.
