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.
mpriestley -at- VNET -dot- IBM -dot- COM said:
> I do want to make one thing _very_ clear: IBM writers do have guidelines to
> work from. In my educated not-so-humble opinion, they're decent, consistent,
> not consistency for consistency's sake. Inasmuch as there is bad writing
> coming out of IBM (and I doubt there's much), it's despite guidelines, not
> because of them.
I'm sorry, Michael, but this made me laugh. OS/2 was repsonsible for
me becoming a technical writer. I was a professor of Japanese, and
late one night I was re-installing OS/2, trying to follow the
documentation, and I had this moment of epiphany: "*I* could write
better documentation than this." And that's basically why, when I was
presented with the opportunity to change careers, I became a technical
writer. (This was about a year and a half ago.)
