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.
Chris Daunhauer offers the idea that supporters of minimalist
documentation tend to be constructivists, while opponents
tend to be behaviorists.
That's a very astute observation, Chris, but I wonder less about what
sort of people support minimalism than I do about what situations it
is appropriate for.
Personally, my feelings on minimalist documentation run hot and cold, but I
think that at this
point it's hard to deny that there is a place for it. Where is that place?
Off the top of my head I
can think of two specific documentation situations, one where minimalism
would seem to be
an ideal solution, and one where I don't think it would work at all.
My girlfriend has been working on a product at her company which handles
workflows and
media asset management. The users will be all sorts of creative types in
many different
environments, though they tend to be people working in film or TV. The
product is highly
flexible, with a great deal of configurability. They're now looking at
providing a minimalist
online help with a comprehensive hardcopy reference. The online would
consist of the fastest,
simplest way to perform any given task, without any grand attempt to
explain everything.
The hardcopy would be for those who like to look under the hood. (Partly
this approach
came from my suggestion, based on something I read on this list from, I
*think*, Tim Altom).
However, I document programming tools - object code libraries in C for
programmers
who need to embed encryption technologies into their applications.
Minimalist doesn't
work there, I believe. Any kind of information you can throw at a
programmer is potentially
useful. In fact, you're getting into some really funky territory, because
I have to teach
the programmers about something they likely know nothing about:
cryptography. So there
is a programmer's reference with all sorts of information about the actual
software libraries
supplied. But there is also a book on how to use the libraries in a
broader sense - the kind
of thing Elna Tymes was talking about a week or two back.
So, not having read Carroll "Nurnberg Funnell", I wonder, are there any
guidelines we
can use when deciding whether a minimalist approach is warranted?
Pete Kloppenburg - pkloppen -at- certicom -dot- com
Technical Writer
Certicom Corp
Mississauga, Ontario,
Canada http://www.certicom.com
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
