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.
> So why can't you simply reproduce the online layout, two per printed
> page, and let this become your printed manual?
I agree with Geoff, and in fact, that's what we're trying to to here.
It seems to me that the conciseness of language that is required online
is a good thing for any sort of technical manual. After all, people do not
read technical manuals (online or on paper) for their lilting prose.
The redundancy and cross referencing that should be built into online
docs is also a good thing on paper. After all, nobody (well, almost nobody)
reads a manual from cover to cover.
> Now I'm certainly, playing devil's advocate here, because I'm
> aware of several stumbling blocks, but it seems to me that you could
> plan around these.
What stumbling blocks have you thought of that can't be cured with
a little conditional text (or the occasional marked section ;-), Geoff?
BTW, folks, notice how I have reproduced very little of Geoff's original
posting above? That's what all this talk of "minimal quoting" is about --
just reproduce what's needed to continue the thought from the previous
message, under the assumption that everyone has indeed read the previous
message.
--
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
