atw: Re: Fields of Tech Communication

  • From: James Hunt <jameshunt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 22:45:19 +1000

Er, no, Bill, I don't dismiss it out of hand at all. I am just bemused 
by people who reinvent a wheel that was running perfectly in 1984. My 
basic point, which Bill missed, was that problems of document structure 
were solved, from a writer's point of view, in a perfectly satisfactory 
manner twenty years ago. The software to implement the solution is 
free, and still exists and runs on everything. (Yes, everything.)

There is a fundamental difference between a database manager's view of 
structure and a writer's view of structure, and my view is that of a 
writer. I want to get words on paper or screen, in a form that people 
like and find helpful, and be able to revise the work quickly as 
necessary. There are no perfect tools for this task: everyone here 
complains about Word, and so on, and all tools have their irritations. 
But there are no convincing, cheap XML/SGML toolsets available for the 
kind of work I do.

I consider this an important point. It is possible for an individual 
writer to buy a few thousand dollars worth of hardware and software, 
download freeware, etc, and produce good-looking - even print quality - 
work that people like to use. This is not possible in the XML/SGML 
world, where rather primitive systems typically cost scores of 
thousands of dollars, minimum, and the writer has no control over and 
usually doesn't even see the output.

Bill's world view is that of a database manager, and I'm sure he does 
it well. However, I have come across XML/SGML proponents who calmly 
dismiss my concerns about readability, accessibility, design, 
typography, and so on as  "decorating documents".  I know I'm just 
playing in a corner of the sandbox here, but to dismiss the entire 
printing tradition of the Western world in such a way is breathtaking 
zealotry.

Does XML/SGML have a future outside Big Defence projects? My guess is 
"no" - it's been the coming thing since 1969, and still seems a long 
way away for everyday use on ordinary corporate work.

Apart from the use of the term "authoring" (nasty case of verbing a 
noun, that), I like the rest of Bill's post. It's interesting to think 
that our trade could divide into two halves, XML persons in defence and 
everyone else. I will cheerfully predict that if that happens, the 
XMLers will be trained and accredited, and working in full-time, 
low-paid jobs filling out containers on screens. The rest of us will do 
all the other stuff.

We live in fascinating times.

James Hunt



On 16 Dec 2004, at 2:19 PM, HALL Bill wrote:

> I'm also stimulated to write this by James Hunt's dismissive comments
> from a few days ago about "structured writing". He has dismissed out of
> hand what is a potentially large area of employment for genuinely
> skilled technical writers.
>
> Probably beginning sometime in the next year (it it hasn't already) the
> Australian defence industry is going to be seeking fairly large numbers
> of tech writers with software, hardware and maintenance experience.
> Something on the order of $A 20 BN (not a misprint!) worth of major
> Defence contracts are either in early startup phase or are due to be
> signed in the next year or so. These projects will generate 
> requirements
> for a monumental amount of technical, maintenance and operating
> documentation, with major sources of work likely to be found in
> Melbourne, Adelaide, Brisbane, Perth, Canberra and Sydney. Jobs from
> major contractors will tend to be long term and offer genuine
> opportunities for career development. For example, I started with the
> ANZAC Ship Project in 1990 just after the contract was signed, helping
> with flowing down requirements from the prime contract into 
> subcontracts
> (some of the latter worth more than $200,000,000 each). Since then I
> have done everything from proper tech writing and training to
> documentation systems analysis and design - leading into to my present
> position in head office dealing primarily with cross divisional and
> cross Group knowledge management issues.
>
> In the past, the defence industry has depended on hiring trained
> tradespeople from the services. However, over the last few years 
> Defence
> has increasingly outsourced the kinds of work that provided the
> in-service training, and industry has not yet realised that they now
> have to take the responsibility for training given that no one else is
> doing it.
>
> Defence technical writing is by its nature is highly structured, in 
> that
> there are formal requirements on the contractors for configuration
> management and delivery in accordance with Australian or international
> defence standards. There will be a real advantage for people who
> understand SGML and XML, and especially those who can make some claim 
> to
> understanding at least some of the Defence standards. At present the
> world-wide defence industry is adopting the S1000D standard (it used to
> have the prefix AECMA - but this has been dropped since the US DoD 
> began
> mandating it for all new projects). The reason S1000D is so popular, is
> that the standard has been designed from the ground up to work in
> conjunction with engineering configuration management.
>
> See http://www.s1000d.com for complete details. The site provides what
> is essentially a complete education in the use of S1000D for free. The
> main source for CM knowledge is http://www.icmhq.com/ (not free). When
> the crunch comes, anyone with writing experience who can also provide
> some evidence that they understand these standards would likely be well
> regarded. Electronic, electrical, mechanical or software trade or
> engineering experience - to say nothing of tech doc management
> experience - would be even better regarded.=20
>
> We're not there yet, but I believe that eventually, the industry will
> have to offer on-the-job training for people who can only offer just 
> one
> of the requisite skills.=20
>
> In any event, if anyone is thinking about switching fields, now is the
> time to consider Defence as one of those fields. However, the writing
> environments will be increasingly structured. For example, Tenix is now
> doing almost all its new tech docs in SGML, with an increasing fraction
> of the authoring being done in a configuration controlled content
> management. So far only one division has switched to the full S1000D
> standard, but my colleagues in Defence tell me this is likely to be
> mandated for the new large contracts.
>
> Regards,
>
> Bill Hall
>
> Documentation Systems Analyst
> Head Office, Engineering
> Tenix Defence
> Williamstown, Vic. 3016
> Phone: 03 9244 4820
> Email:bill.hall@xxxxxxxxx
> URL: http://www.tenix.com
>
> Honorary Research Fellow
> Knowledge Management Lab
> School of Information Management & Systems
> Monash University
> Caulfield East, Vic. 3145
> URL: http://www.sims.monash.edu.au/research/km/
> =20
>
>
> | -----Original message-----
> | From: Ilana Cohney Ilana.Cohney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> | Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:58:58 +1100
> | To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> | Subject: atw: Re: Fields of Tech Communication
> |=20
> | > Hi all,
> | > Not exactly the same topic but I also am considering a work 
> change.=20
> | > Over the years I have been mainly working in a series of 
> permanent=20
> | > positions for both IT and non-IT orgnisations. I have been in my=20
> | > current position for two years. I seems that after a couple=20
> | of years in=20
> | > an orgnisation, the profile and worth of the technical=20
> | writer is much=20
> | > less than it was at the beginning. When I commence a new=20
> | job there is=20
> | > usually much appreciation that at last there is someone who=20
> | can actually=20
> | > write to take over all those pesky documents and Help=20
> | projects. After a=20
> | > year or two the core system, online and procedure documents=20
> | have been=20
> | > written and (in my experience) the writer goes into=20
> | "maintenance" mode.=20
> | > This means that you are no longer seen as an important asset to 
> the=20
> | > company. As was so innocently put to me by my boss last=20
> | week, "In our=20
> | > experience, no-one actually uses the online Help anyway!" After 
> all=20
> | > documentation does not actually generate revenue for the=20
> | business like=20
> | > programming or project management does!
> | >=20
> | > My question actually is, how difficult is it to actually=20
> | make a decent=20
> | > living out of contract work? At the moment, it certainly looks 
> more=20
> | > appealing to me than dealing with another lot of patronising,=20
> | > unappreciative ....need I say more... set of bosses. My problem 
> is=20
> | > that when I am looking for work, I panic and accept a=20
> | permanent job and=20
> | > its security because the thought of starving does not appeal 
> much=20
> | > either. Those of you contractors, do you find the constant=20
> | job search a=20
> | > real grind or do the benefits outweigh the negatives of a 
> permanent=20
> | > position?
> | > Ilana
> | > **************************************************
> | > To post a message to austechwriter, send the message to=20
> | austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> | >=20
> | > To subscribe to austechwriter, send a message to=20
> | austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "subscribe" in the=20
> | Subject field.
> | >=20
> | > To unsubscribe, send a message to=20
> | austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe" in the=20
> | Subject field.
> | >=20
> | > To search the austechwriter archives, go to=20
> www.freelists.org/archives/austechwriter
>> =20
>> To contact the list administrator, send a message to
> austechwriter-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> **************************************************
>
>
> **************************************************
> To post a message to austechwriter, send the message to
> austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> To subscribe to austechwriter, send a message to
> austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "subscribe" in the Subject
> field.
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> with "unsubscribe" in the Subject field.
>
> To search the austechwriter archives, go to
> www.freelists.org/archives/austechwriter
>
> To contact the list administrator, send a message to
> austechwriter-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> **************************************************
> **************************************************
> To post a message to austechwriter, send the message to 
> austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> To subscribe to austechwriter, send a message to 
> austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "subscribe" in the Subject 
> field.
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> with "unsubscribe" in the Subject field.
>
> To search the austechwriter archives, go to 
> www.freelists.org/archives/austechwriter
>
> To contact the list administrator, send a message to 
> austechwriter-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> **************************************************
>
>

**************************************************
To post a message to austechwriter, send the message to 
austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

To subscribe to austechwriter, send a message to 
austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "subscribe" in the Subject field.

To unsubscribe, send a message to austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 
"unsubscribe" in the Subject field.

To search the austechwriter archives, go to 
www.freelists.org/archives/austechwriter

To contact the list administrator, send a message to 
austechwriter-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
**************************************************

Other related posts: