From the Margins to the Center: The Future of Annotation    

This article describes the importance of annotation to reading and writing practices and reviews new technologies that complicate the ways annotation can be used to support and enhance traditional reading, writing, and collaboration processes. Important directions for future research are discussed, with emphasis on studying how professionals read and annotate, how readers might use annotations that have been produced by others, and how the interface of an annotation program affects collaboration and communication on revision. In each area, the authors emphasize issues and methods that will be productive for enhancing theories of workplace and classroom communication as well as implications for the optimal design of annotation technologies.

Wolfe, Joanna L. and Christine M. Neuwirth. Journal of Business and Technical Communication (2001). Articles>Editing>Online

Gathering Together

An index pulls together all the references to a topic that are scattered within a publication. If a reference is omitted, the user may assume that particular sub-topic is not discussed.

Brown, Fred. Allegro Time! (2002). Articles>Indexing>Editing

Gentle Feedback That Encourages Learning  

Offers suggestions on how teachers of technical communication and reviewers of coworkers' documents can offer constructive criticism of others' writing.

Doumont, Jean-Luc. Intercom (2002). Articles>Editing

Getting Ducks in a Row: The Rules for Displayed Lists

When is a list not a list? When it's not recognized as such by the reader. A good displayed list is the mental equivalent of a line of cheerful ducklings behind their sensible mom on their way to an invigorating dip. A short series of items can often be run smoothly into text, but lists longer than eight lines or so tend to stray in the reader's mind from the preceding thoughts. A run-in list that becomes estranged from its lead-in context is worthless.

Jorgensen, Linda B. Editorial Eye, The (1997). Articles>Editing

Getting Reviewers to Review  

Presents ten humorous suggestions for technical writers on how to persuade reviewers of documentation to do their jobs.

Hart, Geoffrey J.S. Intercom (2000). Articles>Editing>Collaboration

Getting Your Style Guide Written!  

This paper describes how to approach the project of writing a stand-alone Style Guide that provides technical writers and other employees with a reference for documentation procedures and policies. A Style Guide project is often placed aside while other priority projects forge ahead. This occurs for several reasons, the most common being that writing a Style Guide is a monumental task! This paper provides you with the skeleton to manage a Style Guide writing project and deliver the product on time

Taylor-Collins, Pamela. STC Proceedings (1995). Articles>Style Guides>Editing

Grammar Stammer

Don't you think that it is a tragedy that 95 percent of the people who desire to be technical writers have a poor command over the language? I am sure all of us make a mistake or two, once in a while. But to make it in every sentence and paragraph shows utter disrespect for readers.

Kamath, Gurudutt R. IT People (2003). Articles>Editing>Grammar>Technical Writing

The Great Hyphenation Hoax

I want to discuss one particular aspect of Chicago's hyphenation advice, which seems questionable at the outset and is so often abused in practice that I think it needs a good thrashing. This is the notion that a compound adjective should be hyphenated when it immediately precedes a noun, and left open when it follows the noun, for example in the predicate. Chicago's example is fast sailing ship, which is ambiguous because it might mean a sailing ship that is fast or a ship that is sailing fast. Hence, to resolve the ambiguity, you hyphenate fast-sailing if you mean to say it is a ship that is sailing fast. But the hyphen is not necessary except when the phrase immediately precedes ship, because the phrase is not ambiguous elsewhere.

Tadfor, Tom Little. Telp.com (1996). Articles>Editing

Guidelines for Technical Edits  

The purpose of the technical edit is to ensure that all materials produced by the Documentation department are as complete and technically accurate as possible. Each document will also pass through a peer edit by a member of the Documentation department after the technical edit is complete, so as a technical editor you do not need to be concerned with issues of style and grammar. Your main focus should be on the technical accuracy of the document. The first step, of course, is simply to check the document for any errors. We need to make sure w have correctly described each feature of the software, as well as the overall design and purpose of the forms and systems we are discussing. Beyond checking for errors, however, we want the documentation we produce to be as helpful to the user as possible. For the purposes of the technical edit, this means not only checking for inaccuracies, but asking whether the document has all the information that is necessary to use the software successfully.

TECHWR-L (2000). Articles>Editing>TC

Help Stamp Out Hype  

Offers tips on eliminating hype from editorial copy.

Eyman, Carol L. Intercom (2001). Articles>Editing

Hints for Developing a Table of Contents

Planning a project before beginning the detailed work is one of the vital steps to success in technical communication. Developing a table of contents is one of the steps in the planning process of a document.

Hollis Weber, Jean. Technical Editors Eyrie (2002). Articles>Editing

Hockey Sticks and User Assistance: Writing in Times of Resource Constraints

If you have all the resources you need, do the very best job you can in all respects. But if your resources are tight, ask yourself whether you are writing the essential stuff at a level of quality users will notice. Also, ask whether the value of the documentation you are producing aligns with the economic pressures on your company.

Hughes, Michael A. UXmatters (2008). Articles>Writing>Technical Editing

How Careful Should Editors Be?

Three recent incidents prompt me to ask, How careful do editors have to be in checking facts? Is it possible for publications people to be too careful?

Taylor, Priscilla S. Editorial Eye, The (1996). Articles>Editing

How Do Editors Do It?

Do you ever feel you'd like a second opinion on a particularly miserable paragraph you've been editing?

Editorial Eye, The (1996). Articles>Editing

How Do You Handle Letters to the Editor?

Letters to the editor can be a headache. Many editors play fast and loose with them, often under orders. Among the worst and most common offenses are choosing letters to bolster a policy and having staff members write letters under other names to influence or misrepresent readers' views.

Writing that Works (2003). Articles>Editing>Business Communication

How to Edit for Content  

Editing involves more than just formatting and inserting page numbers. You need to ask, 'How can I improve the communication?'

Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2003). Articles>Editing>Writing>Technical Writing

How to Proofread and Edit Your Writing

Proofreading is a pain. There's no doubt about it. It can be tedious and boring--if you approach it as correcting errors. But proofreading isn't correcting errors so much as it involves reviewing the paper for ideas and for readability. It allows you to read your draft, to consider what you've written, and to change your mind. It's an opportunity to clarify--for yourself as well as for your reader--what you've said and to make some choices. Proofreading is in your control, no one else's. No one, really, can proofread for you because the kinds of changes that come form proofreading are changes in your meaning, your intent, and your purpose in the draft. But while no one can proofread for you, others, a classmate, or a writing assistant at the Writing Resource Center, can help you proofread; they can help you assess the draft, propose some alternative solutions, and make some choices. So, while proofreading can be tedious, it doesn't have to be lonely.

Morgan, M.C. Bemidji State University (1997). Articles>Editing

How to Think (and Act) Like an Editor: Training for Editors  

In this workshop, participants will experience portions of a performance-based training program for technical editors. The program emphasizes the skills that STC Fellow Lola Zook calls 'learning not only what the editor is to do, but what the editor ought to be.'

Ecker, Pamela S. STC Proceedings (1995). Articles>Editing

How to Write Glossaries  

Glossaries can be quite difficult to write, mainly because some definitions require so much research. While many definitions can be found online, others cannot. For these, you will have to read standards, Requests for Comments (RFCs), and books—a lot of work for a three- or four-line definition!

Docsymmetry (2003). Articles>Editing>Glossary

Identifying Additions and Deletions, Part I: Using Compatible Software  

Hart describes the problems and possibilities of Microsoft Word's Track Changes feature.

Hart, Geoffrey J.S. Intercom (2001). Articles>Editing>Software>Word

Identifying Additions and Deletions, Part II: Incompatible Software  

Hart describes the difficulties of viewing electronic edits when the editor and the author are using incompatible software, and offers tips for working around these difficulties.

Hart, Geoffrey J.S. Intercom (2002). Articles>Editing>Software>Video

Implementing On-Screen Editing  

On-screen editing offers obvious advantages over paper editing, including greater accuracy, shorter turnaround times, and improved consistency. Because authors don’t have to retype handwritten edits, there’s less risk of misreading or missing corrections. Moreover, the edits have already been typed and spellchecked, so no new typos are introduced. Most editors can also enter corrections faster with a keyboard than with a pen, particularly when complex edits require restructuring of the document or extensive rewording, and eliminating the retyping phase further reduces turnaround times. Last but not least, using the search tools makes it easier to achieve consistency in long or complex documents.

Hart, Geoffrey J.S. Intercom (2004). Articles>Editing>Online

Improving Your Editing Efficiency: Software Skills, Soft Skills, and Survival Skills  

Editing efficiently involves a mix of software skills, soft (human) skills, and strategies for surviving chaos. Although software skills are certainly important--we never have as much time as we need, and computers really can help--we must still nurture author-editor relationships. Knowing the strategies battle-scarred editors have developed over the years can save you from duplicating those scars. In this paper, I'll discuss the software skills you'll need to work efficiently, how to cope with the human factors involved in editing, and some strategies for managing the often-chaotic editorial life.

Hart, Geoffrey J.S. STC Proceedings (2005). Articles>Editing>Software

Incorporating Peer Review

Peer review is an exercise in which students review each other's written work. Peer review is often connected to revision, a part of the writing process in which writers refine and make substantive changes to their written work.

University of Minnesota (2004). Articles>Education>Editing>Writing