Re: Does a Professional Tech Writer need to follow the Chicago Manual of Style?

[Jan Stanley <janron -at- CONCENTRIC -dot- NET>]

<Caution:  long reply ahead.>

Dave asked, "Should I be relying on one particular (published)
style guide when creating documents? Or is it more important to
use your own rules consistently and wisely?"

I vote for the latter.  It's not only that there's no single
style manual that can address all of the questions you'll run
into, it's also that many of the published manuals are designed
to be used primarily in particular fields.  (For instance,
Chicago in scholarly publishing; AP [Associated Press] in
newspaper publishing.)  Not all of the guidelines that suit
another field will suit tech writing.  And although Microsoft's
style manual and Sun's Read Me First! offer guidelines that may
work for some tech writing, they don't suit all tech writing, nor
do they offer enough of the general style advice that tech
writers are bound to need.

Much depends on circumstances, of course.  I do freelance
editing; I have done tech writing.

As a freelance editor, I follow the style rules my client gives
me.  Usually the client has a guide that addresses things that
are specific to that company or field, then says something like,
"for other style issues, follow This Approved Manual (Chicago,
APA, AP, GPO, and so on); for spelling and hyphenation, follow
This Dictionary (MWC10, AHD3, and so on)."  I keep a project
style sheet for each ms. I work on.  If I run into a style issue
that isn't covered by the Approved Manual, I extrapolate from the
Approved Manual, then list the treatment I've chosen on the style
sheet.  So I'm making a choice, but well within the client's
guidelines.

Dave "consult[s] each one until I find a convention that works
for me."

When I'm calling the shots, as when I'm the Lone Tech Writer, I
do the same thing:  consult my many style manuals and select the
guidelines that work best for the project.  For instance,
although I admire and follow many of Chicago's guidelines (hooray
for the serial comma and the precision it allows!), it doesn't
make sense to me to spell out numbers through ninety-nine -- as
Chicago would -- in a users manual.  So I spell 'em out through
nine and use numerals for 10 and above.

I think the key is to make an informed, well-reasoned decision,
and to be consistent enough that readers can't be confused
(however minimally and subconsciously) by what should be, to
them, invisible.  Readers should "see" the ideas presented, not
the way a compound is hyphenated, not the way a term is
capitalized.

Regards,
Jan
janron -at- concentric -dot- net

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