OT: MIL specs (was RE: general publication quiestion)
Why hurt Muslims' feelings with creative expressions such as Islamofascists? Don't get me wrong, I am not a Muslim. Yet when a hijab-clad mother of six was killed in broad daylight in front of her three-year-old in Fremont, California on Thursday, I could not but feel the pain of the anguished family. Her only fault was that she wore the scarf encouraged by her faith, just as jews would wear a scull-cap, Christians would wear a cross, Sikhs would wear a turban, and Hindus would wear a red Bindi. Labels hurt. If as enlighted writers we are free to use terms such as Islamofacists, how do we stop people from coining derogatory phrases using our religions, ethnicity, and color? This is a land of the free and the brave. However, some self-regulation is in order. Where is the moderator? In response to: From: Combs, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: OT: MIL specs (was RE: general publication quiestion) To: Daniel Emory [EMAIL PROTECTED],Framers List framers@FrameUsers.com Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain;charset=us-ascii snip Don't get me wrong -- I'm a huge fan of the US military (especially when they're killing Islamofascists). I donate to Soldier's Angels, the USO, VFW, PVA, ... ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
OT: MIL specs (was RE: general publication quiestion)
Why hurt Muslims' feelings with creative expressions such as Islamofascists? Don't get me wrong, I am not a Muslim. Yet when a hijab-clad mother of six was killed in broad daylight in front of her three-year-old in Fremont, California on Thursday, I could not but feel the pain of the anguished family. Her only fault was that she wore the scarf encouraged by her faith, just as jews would wear a scull-cap, Christians would wear a cross, Sikhs would wear a turban, and Hindus would wear a red Bindi. Labels hurt. If as enlighted writers we are free to use terms such as Islamofacists, how do we stop people from coining derogatory phrases using our religions, ethnicity, and color? This is a land of the free and the brave. However, some self-regulation is in order. Where is the moderator? In response to: From: "Combs, Richard" <richard.co...@polycom.com> Subject: OT: MIL specs (was RE: general publication quiestion) To: "Daniel Emory" ,"Framers List" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain;charset="us-ascii" Don't get me wrong -- I'm a huge fan of the US military (especially when they're killing Islamofascists). I donate to Soldier's Angels, the USO, VFW, PVA, ...
OT: MIL specs (was RE: general publication quiestion)
Maybe we should change it to "This page intentionally left almost completely blank," to be more technically accurate :) Regards, Shmuel Wolfson 052-763-7133 Combs, Richard wrote: Daniel Emory wrote: Certainly I don't advocate the use of MIL specs for preparing commercial manuals. I do know, however, that most tech writers who produce manuals for commercial products remain blissfully unaware of the problems caused by their outputs. A valid point. Although some of us, at least, aren't _blissful_ about it. Resigned, maybe. Sometimes whining and grumbling. All I was trying to say is that tech writers in the non-military world should take advantage of remedial measures taken by the military to minimize foul-ups. True, when they're applicable. But don't forget the two most important concepts in the technical communications field: (1) It depends. (2) Know your audience. When your audience includes HS grads and GEDs, and they may be under stress, in a hurry, or otherwise highly distracted, and the consequences of a communication failure may be grave -- well, that's a bit different, I suspect, from telling UNIX system administrators how to upgrade the boot server software for their teleconferencing bridges. Software engineers, in particular, are often very literal-minded and Spockian. I've actually had an engineer point to an "Intentionally Blank" page (in another company's manual) and say, "A page is only blank if there's nothing on it." :-) Richard -- Richard G. Combs Senior Technical Writer Polycom, Inc. richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom 303-223-5111 -- rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom 303-777-0436 -- ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [1]sbw at actcom.com. Send list messages to [2]framers at lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to [3]framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com or visit [4]http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/sbw%40actcom.co m Send administrative questions to [5]lisa at frameusers.com. Visit [6]http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. References 1. mailto:sbw at actcom.com 2. mailto:framers at lists.frameusers.com 3. mailto:framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com 4. http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/sbw%40actcom.com 5. mailto:lisa at frameusers.com 6. http://www.frameusers.com/
Re: OT: MIL specs (was RE: general publication quiestion)
Certainly I don't advocate the use of MIL specs for preparing commercial manuals. I do know, however, that most tech writers who produce manuals for commercial products remain blissfully unaware of the problems caused by their outputs. Unlike typical users of commercial products, most users of MIL=SPEC manuals have received thorough training on the systems they will maintain/operate, including classroom exposure to the manuals they will use after they graduate. Nevertheless, they frequently foul up, and sometimes it's because the manual is poorly written or deficient in other ways. Unlike the commercial world, the military reacts by investigating manual-caused snafus, and taking corrective action, which may include modification of both the training and the manuals. All I was trying to say is that tech writers in the non-military world should take advantage of remedial measures taken by the military to minimize foul-ups. One such remedial measure was to require blank pages to have the infamous THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK appear in the middle of each empty page. The absence of this statement on a blank page assures that the reader knows something is missing. The military learned the necessity of this measure the hard way, yet the general ridicule this subject receives each time it arises is equivalent to ridiculint the fact that car manufacturers discovered it was wise to prevent idiots from starting their automobile while the shift lever is set to reverse. --- Combs, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Daniel Emory wrote: The fact is that the US military is the only true laboratory where technical documentation is subjected to extensive post-publication review to determine its effectiveness in the real world. Findings resulting from analyses of actual foul-ups lead to continuing improvements in tech manual instructions. Those who write manuals for non-military applications ought to also take advantage of that laboratory. First there was only one way. Now there's the only true laboratory. I'm seeing a pattern here... Ever hear the (chiefly British) expression horses for courses? :-) Don't get me wrong -- I'm a huge fan of the US military (especially when they're killing Islamofascists). I donate to Soldier's Angels, the USO, VFW, PVA, ... But if some edict were to declare that henceforth all technical documentation everywhere must be done to MIL specs, I suspect I'd change professions or retire. At the least, I'd have to go on anti-depressants. Dan Emory Associates FrameMaker/FrameMaker+SGML Document Design Database Publishing [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: OT: MIL specs (was RE: general publication quiestion)
Daniel Emory wrote: Certainly I don't advocate the use of MIL specs for preparing commercial manuals. I do know, however, that most tech writers who produce manuals for commercial products remain blissfully unaware of the problems caused by their outputs. A valid point. Although some of us, at least, aren't _blissful_ about it. Resigned, maybe. Sometimes whining and grumbling. snip All I was trying to say is that tech writers in the non-military world should take advantage of remedial measures taken by the military to minimize foul-ups. True, when they're applicable. But don't forget the two most important concepts in the technical communications field: (1) It depends. (2) Know your audience. When your audience includes HS grads and GEDs, and they may be under stress, in a hurry, or otherwise highly distracted, and the consequences of a communication failure may be grave -- well, that's a bit different, I suspect, from telling UNIX system administrators how to upgrade the boot server software for their teleconferencing bridges. Software engineers, in particular, are often very literal-minded and Spockian. I've actually had an engineer point to an Intentionally Blank page (in another company's manual) and say, A page is only blank if there's nothing on it. :-) Richard -- Richard G. Combs Senior Technical Writer Polycom, Inc. richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom 303-223-5111 -- rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom 303-777-0436 -- ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
OT: MIL specs (was RE: general publication quiestion)
Daniel Emory wrote: > The fact is that the US military is the only true laboratory > where technical documentation is subjected to extensive > post-publication review to determine its effectiveness in the > real world. Findings resulting from analyses of actual > foul-ups lead to continuing improvements in tech manual > instructions. Those who write manuals for non-military > applications ought to also take advantage of that laboratory. First there was "only one way." Now there's the "only true laboratory." I'm seeing a pattern here... Ever hear the (chiefly British) expression "horses for courses"? :-) Don't get me wrong -- I'm a huge fan of the US military (especially when they're killing Islamofascists). I donate to Soldier's Angels, the USO, VFW, PVA, ... But if some edict were to declare that henceforth all technical documentation everywhere must be done to MIL specs, I suspect I'd change professions or retire. At the least, I'd have to go on anti-depressants. ;-) Happy weekend! Richard -- Richard G. Combs Senior Technical Writer Polycom, Inc. richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom 303-223-5111 -- rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom 303-777-0436 --
OT: MIL specs (was RE: general publication quiestion)
Daniel Emory wrote: > Certainly I don't advocate the use of MIL specs for preparing > commercial manuals. I do know, however, that most tech > writers who produce manuals for commercial products remain > blissfully unaware of the problems caused by their outputs. A valid point. Although some of us, at least, aren't _blissful_ about it. Resigned, maybe. Sometimes whining and grumbling. > All I was trying to say is that tech writers in the > non-military world should take advantage of remedial measures > taken by the military to minimize foul-ups. True, when they're applicable. But don't forget the two most important concepts in the technical communications field: (1) It depends. (2) Know your audience. When your audience includes HS grads and GEDs, and they may be under stress, in a hurry, or otherwise highly distracted, and the consequences of a communication failure may be grave -- well, that's a bit different, I suspect, from telling UNIX system administrators how to upgrade the boot server software for their teleconferencing bridges. Software engineers, in particular, are often very literal-minded and Spockian. I've actually had an engineer point to an "Intentionally Blank" page (in another company's manual) and say, "A page is only blank if there's nothing on it." :-) Richard -- Richard G. Combs Senior Technical Writer Polycom, Inc. richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom 303-223-5111 -- rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom 303-777-0436 --
