Re: Purpose of document review process?

["M. Dannenberg" <midannen -at- SI -dot- BOSCH -dot- DE>]

Nancy McDonald wrote:

> My reviewer (right now) usually deletes my "ordinary language"
> statements, and replaces them with obviously technical talk... when I am
> positive that he is incorrect in editing his reviews (in this project
> he's the project mgr/developer, and always thinks he's right) I use my
> ultimate weapon: "Well in the Microsoft manual of style that we're
> relying on..." and he immediately says, "whatever works," and shuts up!!
> That's the best reason that I use it, not to mention I've been asked to
> make my user manual a Microsoft user guide clone... <groan>

Developers always think in algorithms, so they get really confused if we
tell them that there's NO ALGORITHM in techwriting. Then they get all
stroppy and start thinking these techwriter guys are complete losers
because they don't have an algorithm. The next best thing to an
algorithm is of course a rulebook, which is where the MS-Manual of Style
comes in handy.

If that doesn't help, I've also got the Chicago MoS on my desk, that's
nice and thick and heavy, with that I can whack even the most
thick-headed developer unconscious with a flick of my wrist.

Gotta laugh,

Mike

--
Mike Dannenberg
ETAS GmbH & Co.KG
midannen -at- si -dot- bosch -dot- de

 TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot-  Send commands
   to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
  Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/  or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html