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: occupational outlook handbook From:"Christopher M. Fisher" <Christopher_M_Fisher -at- ANDERSEN -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 13 Dec 1994 19:04:46 CS
>"Technical writers put scientific and technical information into readily
>understandable language. They prepare manuals, catalogs, parts lists, and
>instructional materials used by sales representatives to sell a wide variety
>of machinery and equipment and by technicians to install, maintain, and
>service it (U.S . Dept. of Labor 186)."
>As a technical writer yourself, do you think this statement is true and
>accurate?
A few quick thoughts on this definition:
1. I think that using a catch-all term like "instructional materials," and
placing said term at the end of the list of things that tech writers prepare,
is a little misleading. I think that today's tech writer is expected to be
something of a training expert; almost all of the documentation that I produce
could be described as "instructional materials," but very little of it could be
classified as "manuals."
2. The second sentence emphasizes the use of tech writer-produced materials to
*sell* products, which I think misrepresents our profession. The STC Code for
Communicators states that we should "satisfy the audience's need for
information," and unless you view the organization that owns the
product/process being documented as the most important member of your
audience--and there may be a good argument for this in some cases--I don't
think that you should write primarily to satisfy that organization.
3. For some reason, the words "machinery and equipment" don't seem to apply to
software products; maybe it's just me. These words are also inadequate to
describe any process that isn't related to operating a physical object, such as
the process for developing or improving a business function.
Granted, most of these issues are more concerned with connotation than
denotation, but they just popped into my head and I had to write 'em down
*somewhere*. Rebuttals?
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Christopher Fisher
Communication Specialist cfisher -at- andersen -dot- com
Andersen Consulting
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
"'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you _can_ make words
mean so many different things.' 'The question is,' said Humpty
Dumpty, 'which is to be master--that's all.'" --Lewis Carroll
