I think that their are two kinds of Technical Proofing/Editing. 1. Technical/Functional Editing - This is performed by the SME. It is to check that all of your technical facts are correct. This could be QA engineers, Software Programmers, or like at my company, PH.D scientists. (Most of the people in this category, at my company, are ESL and cannot check the English.)
2. Writing Editing - This is performed by another Technical Writer or an Editor. It is to check your English (or whatever language you write in), grammar, spelling, flow and technical writing. (Most of the people in this category, at my company, are not Engineers and can't check the facts, only the writing). Both sets of people need to proof your docs and check for what falls under their expertise. Thank you, Gillian Flato -----Original Message----- From: framers-bounces+gflato=nanometrics....@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces+gflato=nanometrics.com at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Shmuel Wolfson Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 5:30 AM To: framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: OT - Who should be responsible for proofing? The writer should read it over, but IMHO someone else should also read it. It's hard for the same person to catch all the mistakes and ambiguities. Regards, Shmuel Wolfson Steve Rickaby wrote: > An interesting discussion, and you all make very valid points. Here in the UK some of the folks I work with still make the traditional distinction between copy-editing and proofreading that dates from the days of hot metal. However, the terms are becoming blurred, and this is causing some confusion. > > This confusion become damaging when it results in a final production process that misses the fact that the proofer has no content knowledge. It also leads to the question of whether *copy-editing* can be performed in any effective way by someone without content knowledge: my contention is 'no', but in fact this is often what happens... 'copy-editing' is confused with 'proofreading'. > > I believe that it *is* possible to effectively edit and proof your own work, but it is hard, and requires a substantial mind-shift. I agree that it is certainly not desirable, but sometimes it cannot be avoided for cost or other reasons. > > Story: some time ago I was commissioned to write a book. After writing it, I lightly copy-edited it as time allowed. The publisher then sent the Ms to a trained freelance proofreader (or, as I thought, copy-editor). I applied their corrections. Some time later I was reworking the material and found some glaring errors, so I carried out a complete reproof and analysis. I was quite shocked at the number of undiscovered errors I found. Some were typos, some were technical. It turned out that the proofreader had little or no understanding of the content. > > I suppose the moral is that sometimes things don't turn out as you expect even if you do everything 'right'. > > _______________________________________________ You are currently subscribed to Framers as gflato at nanometrics.com. Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/gflato%40nanometrics .com Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. This message (including any attachments) may contain confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose. If you are not the intended recipient, delete this message. If you are not the intended recipient, disclosing, copying, distributing, or taking any action based on this message is strictly prohibited.