Re: Dividing the Tech writer job

[GM Vick <gmv -at- NETCOM -dot- COM>]

<<Typists do not "grow into technical writers.">>

<<<<An arrow shot threw my heart as I read this. Nonsense! I began as a
<<<<typist/typesetter in the early '70s.

It may be that you're the exception. I've got to say, I've known a lot of
admin/clerical workers in my time who were great typists and able to get
around reasonably well in several software packages, but couldn't write a
sentence to save their life. We've been finishing up a discussion where a
lot of people agreed that it is more important for a neophyte technical
communicator to be able to write well to be qualified for a job than be
able to learn a software package. The real question, is whether the
"documentation girls" (two thumbs way down for that phrase, which I was
disappointed to note came from a woman) can and want to write. IMHO, if
they don't already express themselves at least reasonably well in writing,
then no amount of training will turn them into worthwhile technical
writers even if they become technically competent.

I've encountered a sizeable belief among management that any college
graduate is able and qualified to be a tech writer. This is an assumption
that I suspect is in play here, and the assumption is wrong. Good
technical writing is an art that focuses on the representation of things
or actions in the real world as much as it is learning either grammatical
rules or software packages.

G

 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=