Technical Editors: Are We Are Own Worst Enemies? Strategies For Working With Authors  

The authors explore two studies of cognitive assessments, the Myers Briggs Type Indicator and Boundary Spanning of technical communicators, give readers an opportunity to score themselves, and then they argue that knowing the cognitive differences between technical communicators and the authors they edit can help them improve working relationships with authors. When copyediting, they suggest making suggestions rather than dictates; providing rationale for suggestions; basing suggested changes on style guides, standard references and communication research; and using a levels- of-edit approach.

Zimmerman, Donald E. and Charlotte Taylor. STC Proceedings (1999). Articles>Editing>Technical Editing

Technical Translation: Craft, Not Commodity  

Describes the work of translators and suggests strategies buyers can use to find the best translator for their needs.

Cardillo, Louis M. Intercom (2004). Articles>Editing>Localization>Technical Writing

Technical Writing Is Unique  

Bush clarifies the role of technical editors in light of the particular purposes of technical documents.

Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2001). Articles>Editing>TC

Technischer Redakteur

Der Technische Redakteur erstellt und aktualisiert aussagefähige, umsetzbare, verständliche technische Dokumentationen aller Art.

Wikipedia. (German) Articles>Writing>Technical Editing

Technology: A Blessing for Writers and Editors?

Computers have changed the way writers and editors work. But are we getting the most from the new tools?

Bodzin, Gene. Writer's Block (1996). Articles>Writing>Editing>Online

Ten More Errors in Technical Writing

So, well, here are 10 more errors. This time we will focus on grammar and punctuation. Most of these are simplistic and obvious. But then they are too common. As usual, I have slipped in some content for the advanced writers too. (This article is a follow-up to 'One Hundred Simple Tech Writing Errors .)

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

The Art Of Editing: User's Guides Versus Technical Documents  

While contemplating topic areas for a presentation at this year's conference, our biggest challenge was the fact that not all technical editors edit the same type of documents. Presentations at STC conferences are heavily concentrated toward user documentation and software instructional manuals. With that as our prime focus, we identified six common elements that we both consider as we edit a document. We then compared our methods of approaching these elements. One of us edits primarily user's guides and procedural manuals; the other edits scientific and technical documents.

Cluff, Susan C. and Sandra R. Marks. STC Proceedings (1994). Articles>Documentation>Editing>Technical Editing

Three Types of Editing  

Bush describes the differing challenges of editing proposals, manuals, and professional papers.

Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2002). Articles>Editing

To Err is Human, But Can It Be Forgiven?: Effects and Economics of Typos  

Technical communicators dread typos. A piece of work that contains one or more typos is seen as shoddy, not something to be proud of. Finding and correcting these errors, however, takes time and costs money. Might there be a better way to spend resources?- ways that might produce more usable information.? Effects of errors, value added by correcting them, and the economics of error detection will be discussed.

Grice, Roger A., Lenore S. Ridgway Richard K. Ridgway and Edward J. See. STC Proceedings (1995). Articles>Editing>Grammar

Trust Your Instincts As You Write

As I write, and even after I have finished and am proofing my work, I have to be sure to be tuned in to a diminutive little editor who sits to one side of my mind.

Usborne, Nick. Excess Voice (2002). Articles>Writing>Editing

Typography and Page Layout: Proofreaders' Marks

A collection of professional proofreaders' marks.

Magnik, John. Typography First. Articles>Editing

Typography and Page Layout: Proofreading

Proofreading involves a critical comparison of the author's copy and the typesetter's proof to be sure that the live copy (the typeset proof) matches the dead copy (the author's copy) word for word, and letter for letter.

Magnik, John. Typography First. Articles>Editing

Usage Experts Change Their Minds, Too

Many terms and constructions frowned on a generation ago have been admitted, like many new words, into mainstream parlance and have gained wider acceptance than before. An example is tycoon, in the sense of a wealthy businessman, labeled 'informal' in the first edition of AHD but accepted in the third. Another example is balding, called 'entirely vulgar' in a usage note by panelist Katherine Anne Porter in the first edition but entered without stigma in the third.

Soukhanov, Anne H. Editorial Eye, The (2003). Articles>Style Guides>Editing

The User Edit Method for Evaluating the Usability of Documentation

A 'user edit' (also known as a 'usability edit') enables you to evaluate the usability of documentation (Schriver, 1991). Participants in a user edit study can either think aloud as they use the documentation to complete tasks or they can mark up the pages of the documentation to indicate where they had problems. The think-aloud protocols or marked-up pages are then reviewed for usability problems. The user edit report lists the problems and recommendations about how to improve the usability of the documentation.

Wilson, Chauncey E. Usability Interface (2006). Articles>Documentation>Editing>Usability

Using Editors to Win Proposals  

Paradoxically, engineers are often forced to seek jobs by pursuing a skill at which they are, admittedly, often inferior: expository writing. To win proposals for new business, they have to put their worst foot forward. This unhappy situation presents a great opportunity for editors.

Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2004). Articles>Editing>Proposals

Using Editors Where and When It Counts, Part II: How to Edit Instructions

When I teach courses on editing, I devote about one-third of the sessions to editing instructions. Why? True, there's always a demand for someone who can edit technical manuals or cookbooks, but my real reason is that working on instructions gets you into editorial shape. It hones your ability to keep readers and their needs always in mind, to weigh each word for accuracy, and to be sure that every sentence means what the writer intends.

Waxman, Maron L. Editorial Eye, The (2003). Articles>Documentation>Editing

Using Virtual Peer Review through the Online Writing Center

Virtual Peer Review is an exercise in which students review the written work of other students in online or Internet-based settings. Just like peer review--an activity in which readers make suggestions for improvement on another person's writing--virtual peer review supports revision in the writing process. The difference is that this review process is conducted using online technologies.

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

What Exactly Is a Copy Editor?

Copy editors check written material, usually as the final step before it is set into type, to correct errors in grammar, spelling, usage and style (in this case, style refers to a given publication's guidelines for consistency in how words, phrases, typographical elements, etc., are to be used -- or not used). Copy editors are not proofreaders, although reading proofs is often part of the job description. The difference is that proofreaders (a job title that scarcely exists anymore) are charged with simply looking for typographical and mechanical errors on copy that has already been typeset. Proofreaders -- and, indeed, copy editors reading proofs -- are often criticized rather than praised for making picky changes at that stage in the process, whereas the same changes might well be applauded at the copy-editing stage.

Walsh, Bill. Slot, The (2002). Articles>Editing

When You Have to Edit Your Own Writing  

Many technical writers work without the benefit of professional editing. While there is no substitute for a seasoned editor, writers can and should learn to perform some checks themselves. Checklists narrow the focus of editing and provide a systematic approach to polishing familiar prose. Numerous tips can also make editing easier and more effective.

Hansen, James B. STC Proceedings (1996). Articles>Editing

"Why Do We Need Editors Anyway?" Overcoming the Obstacles Facing a New Editing Group  

In the corporate arena, an editing group (particularly a newly formed one) sometimes finds it difficult to be accepted as part of a communications team and may spend an inordinate amount of its energy seeking to justify its existence. Barriers to acceptance and credibility include lack of trust and misunderstanding about what editors do or what value editing imparts. Editors can overcome these obstacles, however, through a combination of consistent work practices, clear and frequent communication with writers, and an ongoing program aimed at demonstrating the practical value of editing.

Collins, William L. STC Proceedings (1995). Articles>Editing>Collaboration

Why Edit On Screen?  

Provides a thorough introduction to the practices of on-screen editing, including how to make corrections, insert questions and suggestions, and communicate the results to the author.

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

Why I Hate The Body of Your Article

I really don't care what you write about. I am more interested in the format of the article, not your view or take on the subject matter.

Pires, Halstatt. Ezine Articles (2005). Articles>Writing>Editing

Why I Hate Your Article Headlines

I’m a publisher for numerous sites. Here’s why I hate your headline and what you can do about it.

Pires, Halstatt. Ezine Articles (2005). Articles>Writing>Editing

WikiWiki as Tech Review Vehicle

Like most technical writers, getting my feature team to review my help topics for technical accuracy is like keeping an Iditarod team from making a dash for the nearest McDonalds or garbage dump in the middle of a blinding blizzard.  Technical contributors want to participate in technical documentation reviews but they rarely have enough bandwidth to do so effectively. Consequently, I spend a lot of time trying to determine the most effective way to squeeze my teammates for feedback.  This can be a painstaking process, especially for technical writers who are unlucky enough to work with teams that are halfway around the world or spread across the country. Some contributors only produce if I corner them in their office with a paper copy.  Others are overly motivated, but I love them all the same.  Most technical reviewers, at least at Microsoft, require a combination of:  incentives (food, beer, ...), attention getters (a stern note from their manager) and tech review tools that fit their working style and team culture.

Parnell, Korby. Microsoft (2004). Articles>Editing>Engineering>Assessment

Working Electronically

Editors need to know some basic techniques for dealing with files if they are going to be editing them electronically. These techniques apply to files in any format, but exactly what you do depends on which word-processor, desktop publishing program, help authoring system, or other software you are using.

Hollis Weber, Jean. Technical Editors Eyrie (2001). Articles>Editing>Technical Editing>Online