Calling all Technical Editors again!; Was, "RE: Writing Corrective Actions for customers?"

[Beth Agnew]

I think that's a faulty assumption. As technical writers we know how to 
quickly get up to speed on an area of content in which we do not have 
specialized knowledge, and shape that content into something useful for 
the audience. We are communications experts, not necessarily trained 
experts in aerospace or any other discipline when we get started, but 
we're people who can learn rapidly, understand deeply, empathize with 
the user sufficiently to know what they need and how to say it, and 
produce workable solutions to information problems.

The turnaround time is not anywhere near what it would take an expert in 
the subject matter to learn how to communicate. If the "experts" were so 
good at doing so, we wouldn't have a profession in the first place. The 
plain truth is that they are not. Do we so quickly forget the unreadable 
and unusable computer documentation written by the computer experts? 
Your BIOS example proves that case. Dollars to doughnuts that 
information that was so unhelpful was written by the computer expert and 
not a skilled technical writer. I don't need to take a 4-year 
engineering degree to be able to write about bearings, I only need to 
determine the information needs of my audience, find where that 
information resides, and bridge the two. Our skills are in 
communications and information processing; we can apply that to any 
industry.

It's an age-old debate that gluts the techwr-l archives, and I doubt 
we'll ever get resolution. We're not saying the writer has no knowledge 
at all, we're saying that technical writers have skills that enable them 
to acquire a sufficient amount of subject knowledge in a short period of 
time to get the job done. We are adept learners, most of us self-taught 
in many subject areas, and we gain whatever knowledge we need, when we 
need it. We are indeed experts, but experts in communication.
--Beth

Ned Bedinger wrote:
> Suppose a User says, "Writer, I need cross-reference tables so I can 
> find and source Korean replacement roller bearings when the OEM 
> German-made bearings wear out."
>
> If the author had those tables already available, fine, no need to know 
> any more about it. The work could be done by the mailroom clerk or the 
> holder of the patents form roller bearings, and it wouldn't matter.
>
> But if the author had to start from scratch learming what roller 
> bearings are, what types are made in Germany, what Korean ane German 
> manufacturers to contact for specifications, and how to compare Korean 
> and German rating systems, and whre to look for thi9s sort of 
> information, then the turnaround time on the user's request would leap 
> from a day to an impractically long time.  Wouldn't it?
>
> That is the assumption I'm making about why the writer needs the knowledge.
> <snip>
>
> For example, when I boot my PC and hit <Del> to set up BIOS parameter 
> values, I need to know what those parameters are about. I look in the 
> online BIOS help, but it is pathically uninformative.  I look in the 
> motherboard documentation, and it says exactly what the online help 
> says. I trace the BIOS back to the manufacturer, who looks it up, points 
> me to a web site where I can read the specification. I need a monster 
> amount of knowledge to get what I need from the spec. It is very technical.
>