Re[2]: QUERY: How much "tech" to expect from tech editors?

Subject: Re[2]: QUERY: How much "tech" to expect from tech editors?
From: Vince Putman <PUTMV -at- MAIL -dot- SYNTRON -dot- COM>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 07:30:29 CST

Glenda,

Exactomundo, as you said:

>Perhaps you are really saying that we should not bother to hire writers or
>editors that do not have engineering backgrounds -- but writers with
>this kind of background are fiendishly difficult to find, in our
>experience. They exist, but they are rare. (You know the old adage about
>engineers not being able to write worth beans...)

In my experience engineers stay out of the TW business because of the low
pay and respect. Many love to write and are very good at it, but the TW
field is muddy and sometimes impossible to plow.

Vince Putman in Houston | Most people think new ideas are just
putmv -at- mail -dot- syntron -dot- com | a criticism of the old ways!!
713-647-7223 FAX 579-7709| Eschew Gratuitous Obfuscation

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________

Subject: Re: QUERY: How much "tech" to expect from tech editors?
Author: Glenda Jeffrey <jeffrey -at- LEMOND -dot- HKS -dot- COM> at INTERNET_MAIL
Date: 3/10/95 6:19 AM

<snip>

Well, in this particular case, the theory is not generally something you
need to understand (deeply) to use the product. Many would argue that to use
it WELL, you should understand a fair amount of theory -- but we try
to aim the product's design in such a way that not too much theory
is really needed.

As far as being able to USE the product: competent use demands engineering
judgement. Here's an example. Our software is used mainly to "model" structures.
That is, tell me what a chair looks like, and how heavy a person you want
sitting in it, and I will use the program to tell you whether or not the
chair will break.

Now, in order to model the chair, the user must decide first what kind
of "elements" to use. If the seat of the chair is very thin, then maybe
s/he could use shell elements. If it's thick, the seat would have to be modeled
with "solid" elements -- basically bricks. The user must understand what
the simplifying assumptions are that go with either choice. This requires
understanding some of the theory behind the "elements", and also having
a feel for the physics of how the chair seat behaves. I think this is
too much to ask of a tech editor (certainly one without an engineering
degree).

Perhaps you are really saying that we should not bother to hire writers
or editors that do not have engineering backgrounds -- but writers with
this kind of background are fiendishly difficult to find, in our experience.
They exist, but they are rare. (You know the old adage about engineers not
being able to write worth beans...)

I think our approach should be
to have the engineers write the first cut, and then depend on the tech
editor to make it more understandable. This demands a bit less
of the tech editor, but s/he must still be able to determine whether
what has been written makes sense. Do you think we need a tech writer
with an engineering background for this?

--
Glenda Jeffrey Email: jeffrey -at- hks -dot- com
Hibbitt, Karlsson & Sorensen, Inc Phone: 401-727-4200
1080 Main St. Fax: 401-727-4208
Pawtucket, RI 02860


Previous by Author: Re[2]: Examination for Japanese tech communicators
Next by Author: Re[5]: Examination for Japanese tech communicators
Previous by Thread: Re: QUERY: How much "tech" to expect from tech editors?
Next by Thread: Re: SURVEY: Technical Editors


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads