Workshop slides for 2-hour presentation on Technical Editing: Foundation for Quality

1. TECHNICAL EDITING:
The Foundation of a Quality Product
Linda Oestreich
16 February 2019
Houston STC
Technical Editing Workshop

2. 22
Introduction & schedule

3. 33
Who am I?
 STC Fellow
 Former STC President
 Former board member at chapter and Society level
 Strategic and business analyst
 HR/EEO analyst
 Technical communicator: manager, editor, writer
 Instructor, trainer, instructional designer
RETIRED!
3

4. 44
Who are you?
 Writers?
 Editors?
 Managers?
 Liberal arts? Science/tech/IT?
 Companies?
 Why here?
4

5. 55
Warm-up exercise!
5
Copy-edit quiz!

6. 66
Schedule
0930 – 0945
 Introduction and schedule
0945 – 1000
 Definition and tools
1000 – 1045
 Value and quality
1045 – 1100 (Break)
1100 – 1130
 Types of edit
1130 – 1200
 Copy and comprehensive editing
6

7. 77
Definition & tools

8. 88
Editorial wisdom
“The work of a good editor, like the work of a
good teacher, does not reveal itself directly;
it is reflected in the accomplishments of
others.”
The Motion Picture Editors Guild Newsletter, Vol. 19, No. 4, July/August 1998
8

9. 99
Technical editing: Textbook definition
 Rude: Technical documents provide information
that readers need to make decisions or complete
tasks. It is part of the process of developing
documents that solve problems or enable readers
to use products.
 Tarutz: Technical is any specialized subject that
addresses a specific audience, has its own jargon,
and whose approach is objective. Editing is a craft.
Practicing a craft means recognizing and
transcending its constraints.

10. 1010
What’s in your editorial toolbox?
On your desk In your head
 Style guides (general & industry-
specific)
 Dictionaries/grammar checkers
 Checklists & style sheets
 Editing markup system
marks)
 Desktop publishing tools
 Use of English language
 Data presentation (information
architecture)
 Typographic & layout knowledge
 Content strategy
 Editing types/levels
 Editorial commenting
 Time management
 People skills
Clements and Waite: People skills: “…one of the most important skills you can
cultivate as a technical editor is the ability to get along well with people. For technical
editing is not solitary work.”

11. 1111
Style guides (examples)
 General
 Chicago Manual of Style
 Elements of Style
 GPO Style Manual
 Modern Language
Association
 Associated Press
 Industry-specific
 American Psychological
Association
 Council of Biology Editors’
Style Guide
 Microsoft Manual of Style
 Read Me First!

12. 1212
Dictionaries
 General
 Webster’s 3rd New
International (1961)
 Merriam-Webster’s
Collegiate Dictionary
(11th ed. 2009)
 American Heritage
Dictionary (5th to be
released late in 2011)
 A plethora of specialized ones
(http://www.yourdictionary.com/diction4.html)
 Technical
 Scientific
 Chemical
 Medical
 Agricultural
 Biological
 Biographical

13. 1313
Checklists and style sheets
 Checklists:
 Each activity in the publication process could have a
checklist: doc plan, writing, editorial, publication
 Ensures consistency
 Aids collaborative and team projects
 Style sheets
 Addition to style guides (company or industry level)
 Document or project level
 Individual guide

14. 1414
Editorial checklist
 Build your own checklist
 Base your checklist on the context (industry, industry
standards, document type, and project life cycle phase)
 Follow a logical progression of activities
 Update checklists as required to reflect new
requirements or changes in supporting documents
 Can be detailed or high-level, or both

15. 1515
Self-made editorial checklist
Task
Description
Grammar Correct grammatical mistakes.
Passive Voice Revise passive sentences to make them active, where appropriate.
Lists Check that bulleted, numbered, procedure, and terminology lists are used and styled
appropriately.
Headings Check that headings are used appropriately; check for organization, parallelism,
so on.
Tables and Figures Check that table and figure numbers are consecutive. Check that table and figure titles
captions are title capped, are phrases (as opposed to complete sentences), and that they
and concisely describe the table or figure.
Cross-References Check that cross-references are accurate and relevant, and create links.
Terminology Research technical terms and acronyms for consistency, accuracy, and inclusion in a
project’s glossary or index. Ensure that new terms are appropriately defined in the text.
definitions with other book or series definitions, and ensure published definition is
the best one available.
Formatting Check for and fix obvious formatting issues. If project doesn’t have a production
ensure all formatting is correct and fits style guide.

16. 1616
Company editorial checklist
 A checklist can
act as a
reminder and
offer a way to
keep within the
type or level of
edit

17. 1717
Editor’s rough style sheet

18. 1818
Style sheet
template

19. 1919
Exercise: Read passage and create a rough style
sheet

20. 2020
Did you include these things? Why/why
not?
 Inches
 Feet
 Fahrenheit
 Degree signs
 Serial commas
 Hyphen use
 Number use

21. 2121
Hard skills and soft skills
 Corbin:
 Hard skills: writing ability, superb sensitivity to language
and communication; information design, graphic arts,
project management, time management, environment-
based (for example, programming, industry-based
jargon, basic laws of science)
 Soft skills: problem-solving, negotiating, diplomacy, tact,
learning quickly, coaching, teaching, patience, attention
to detail, sympathy, insight, breadth of view, sense
of humor, and imagination
 Tarutz: empathy, restraint, good judgment,
adaptability, flexibility, persuasion, decisiveness

22. 2222
What traits make a good editor?
 Which of these traits is most important in a good
editor?
 Personality?
 Skills?
 Talent?
 Passion?
 Problem solving?

23. 2323
Value & quality

24. 2424
The who of technical editing: Audience
 In technical writing classes, we learn that end users
(audiences) fall into one of four categories:
 Layperson
 Technical
 Expert
 Administrator
 In technical editing, you must consider these folks as well as
the end user:
 Writers (technical writers, subject matter experts,
administrators)
 Managers (yours and others’)
 Fellow editors

25. 2525
The what of technical editing: Media
 Computer-based training
materials
 Tutorials
 Data sheets
 Procedures
 Animation
 Multimedia
 Videos
 Podcasts (audio)
 Screencasts
 User interfaces
 Printed materials
 Books
 White papers
 Reports
 Pamphlets
 Quick reference cards
 Electronic materials
 PDF files
 Online help files
 Online documentation
 Web pages

26. 2626
The where of technical editing: Industries
 Computer software and hardware
 Website development
 Engineering
 Medicine
 Sciences
 Government
 Legal, banking, and brokerage services
 Wherever clear technical information is needed

27. 2727
The when of technical editing: Timing
 When in the cycle
 Design (edit in internal documents, storyboards)
 Development (edit drafts)
 Production (edit actual deliverables)
 Ownership can determine the “when”
 Writer owns information, provide markup early
 Editor owns information, modify files directly before
release

28. 2828
The why of technical editing: Quality
 Editing is quality control for written communication
 “Quality control (QC) is a planned and systematic
pattern of all actions necessary to provide adequate
confidence that the product optimally fulfills customer's
expectations.”
(csqafordummies.blogspot.com)
 Definitions of quality for technical information
 Five Cs: clear, concise, consistent, correct, concrete
 More detailed: accuracy, clarity, completeness,
concreteness, organization, retrievability, style, task
orientation, visual effectiveness

29. 2929
The value of technical editing,
as defined by STC Technical Editing SIG
 Improves document readability and usability
 Increases the writers’ overall productivity
 Increases writers’ product knowledge
 Reduces translation costs
 Protects the company from legal oversights by helping keep
copyright information and other legal lingo that is current and
consistent
 Reduces calls to Customer Support by frustrated clients
 Increases sales
 Eliminates lost revenue and the costs involved in saving face
after a poor, negative, or offensive message has been sent
out

30. Why do we define metrics
 To measure the value of the information
 Improved, simplified documentation & UIs
 Easier to use documentation & UIs
 To increase benefits
 Productivity (our own, but our customers’ too)
 Satisfaction (our customers’, but our own, too)
 Sales
 To decrease costs
 Document production costs (resources, processes)
 Support costs (training, help desk, maintenance)
 To demonstrate that writers and editors have a
positive effect on quality & value
30

31. 3131
Defining quality and value
 Before you can measure anything, you must know
what the end goal is:
 Adhering to guidelines
 Meeting defined criteria
 Exhibiting quality characteristics
 Satisfying customers
 Improving usability testing
 Increasing productivity

32. 3232
Measuring quality and value
 After you know what your goals are, you have to
“quantify” them in order to measure them:
 Most involve numbers, ratings, rankings
 Any metric or measurement is valid, if applied
consistently and appropriately
 Perform baseline measurements to start, then use the
same metrics over time to show quality improvement

33. Putting metrics to use
 Collect data only if you are going to use it
 Measure just enough, and at the right time
 Measure the right things
 Try the metrics out; modify to fit
 Use metrics to understand; not to motivate or
evaluate
 Train, describe, and communicate about your
metrics
 Interpret the metrics for others
 Get management commitment!
33

34. Characteristics of useful metrics
 Development
 Appropriate
 Balanced
 Comprehensive
 Inexpensive
 Nonintrusive
 Use
 Discriminating
 Leading indicators
 Quantifiable
 Objective, unbiased
 Statistically reliable
34

35. 3535
Quantify your measurements
 Any metric is valid: if consistent and applied
appropriately!
 Begin with baselines, then use same metrics over
time
 Track # of hours spent on various edits
 Develop metric for average # of pages per hour
 Track editing of new vs. changed pages
 Track percentage of deliverable edited
 Caveats: Some industry standards exist, but those based on
your context and your productivity are best (for example,
what is a page or a topic? what is the markup style?)
35

36. Define quality goals, then measure quality
 Define SMART quality goals
 (http://en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/SMART_criteria)
 Specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, time-bound
 Define the characteristics of quality, define your quality goals
 Absence of defects
 Exceeding customer expectations (beta tests, usability
test, customer surveys)
 Quantify the goals so you can measure them
 Take baseline measurements; then repeated measurements,
show quality improvement over time
 Document the quality goals and metrics, then demonstrate
how they were met.
36

37. How do editors contribute to quality goals?
 Analyzing problem reports from support
 Learning more about actual users, actual problems
 Planning technical edits based on customer pain points
 Demonstrating a reduction in problems in areas over
time
 Measuring the quality of information
 Adhering to guidelines, characteristics
 Identifying a number of defects, showing reduction by
doing second edit
 Editing for Quality (EFQ) edit as described in IBM
Developing Quality Technical Information
37

38. Nine quality characteristics as defined
in DQTI*
 Easy to Use:
1. task orientation
2. accuracy
3. completeness
 Easy to Understand:
4. clarity
5. concreteness
6. style
 Easy to find:
7. organization
8. retrievability
9. visual effectiveness
38
*Developing Quality Technical Information, IBM

39. EFQ process steps
1. Do the EFQ edit and write the report
2. Rate the quality characteristics
3. Confirm the ratings
4. Compute the overall EFQ score
39

40. Step 1: The edit
 A full technical edit, with a focus on the nine quality
characteristics
 Classify the strengths and weaknesses found
during the edit according to the nine quality
characteristics
 Summarize the noteworthy and critical strengths
and weaknesses in a quality report
40

41. Step 2: Rate the quality characteristics
 Assign a satisfaction rating to each quality
characteristic, based on the strengths and
weaknesses identified:
 For example, 1 exemplifies the highest quality with few
or no weaknesses; 2 means that strengths outweigh the
weaknesses; 3 shows strengths and weaknesses
balance; 4 shows weaknesses outweigh the strengths;
5 shows that weak areas greatly affect the effectiveness
of the work
 Use guidelines and rules for assigning the ratings
41

42. Step 3: Confirm the ratings
 Send copies of editing markup and quality report to
two confirming editors
 Confirming editors work to review and markup what
was sent
 Confirming editors assign satisfaction ratings
independently
 Calculate an agreement score between the original
editor and the two confirming editors
 Original editor and confirming editors meet and
reach consensus on ratings
42

43. Step 4: Computing the overall quality score
 Enter ratings into an algorithm that reflects relative
importance of the quality characteristics to your
customer, use a consistent formula to get a final
score.
43

44. Benefits of a quality process
 Writers improve their writing skills, with help from
the quality reports
 Editors improve their editing skills, through peer
reviews and work with confirming editors
 Editors become more consistent in their markup,
their application of corporate guidelines, and the
application of quality characteristics
 Writers can better prioritize their work based on
relative importance of quality characteristics to the
customer and based on the quality report
44

45. 4545
Another definition of value-add?
“Value-add means whatever clients say it means -- to
them and to their organization. In addition, value-add
means incorporating new technologies and social
media research when time and budget allows.”
What 'Value-Added Deliverables' Means Today, Angela
Kangiser, Jan/Feb 2011 Online, a division of Information
Today, Inc.
45

46. 4646
The value of editors
http://www.ftrain.com/editors-ship-dammit.html
 Paul Ford, in Real Editors Ship, says this:
 Editors are really valuable, and, the way things are going,
undervalued. These are people who are good at process.
They think about calendars, schedules, checklists, and get
freaked out when schedules slip. Their jobs are to aggregate
information, parse it, restructure it, and make sure it meets
standards. They are basically QA for language and meaning.

47. 4747
Value-add resources
 Articles and information about adding value as technical
communicators:
 Adding Value as a Professional Technical Communicator:
http://wps.ablongman.com/wps/media/objects/2463/2522777/
docs/teLayoutTutorialFinal.pdf
 Adding Value: Using Technical Communications to Cut Costs
and Build Sales:
http://www.impactonthenet.com/addvalue.html,
http://www.impactonthenet.com/addvalue.pdf
 Defining "Value-Adding Work" of In-house Information
Development Groups, William O. Coggins,
http://www.ocstc.org/ana_conf/we6r/value-added.html
 “Technical Editing as Quality Assurance: Editing-based
Metrics,” presentation to STC by Michelle Corbin, May 2006

48. 4848
Types & levels of
edit

49. 49
Levels and types of edit
 Classic
 Informal
 Negotiation
 Content-focused (not rules-focused)

50. Why levels of edit?
“Level systems are used to balance the editing depth needed by
a document against the demands to meet a deadline or a
budget target.”
“Levels of editing systems provide a framework within which
editors can choose appropriate editorial tasks for a particular
document; most levels systems are set up so that problems
of increasing depth and complexity are addressed as more
time or money becomes available.”
--David E. Nadziejka
50

51. 51
Defining what we do: “...imposing upon it a sense of
organization and rationality...”
(Van Buren and Buehler)
Classic & historic
 Types of edit (9 types)
 Categories of editorial functions
 Coordination, policy, integrity, screening, copy clarification,
format, mechanical style, language, and substantive
 Levels of edit (5 levels)
 Number of specific editorial functions (types of edits)
 Level 5 contains least number of editorial functions (types
of edits); Level 1 contains most number (all)

52. 52
“Classic” levels of edit from Van Buren & Buehler
Level of Edit
Type of Edit Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5
Coordination X X X X X
Policy X X X X X
Integrity X X X X
Screening X X X X
Copy Clarification X X X
Format X X X
Mechanical X X
Language X X
Substantive X
 Nine types classified into five levels

53. 53
An “informal” approach: hierarchy of tasks
(Tarutz)
 Defined a hierarchy, based on task difficulty, time
on task, and skill level involved
 Typical uses: establish common language, sizing &
estimating, training new editors, scheduling

54. 54
“Informal” levels from Tarutz
 Turning pages – superficial look at text
 Skimming – obvious spelling, grammar, punctuation
 Skimming and comparing – internal consistency, cross-
references
 Reading – writing style, such as wording, usage
 Analyzing – organizational flaws, missing info,
redundancies, technical inconsistencies
 Testing and using – technical errors, usability problems

55. 55
Negotiation-based types of edits (Weber)
 Rules-based editing
 Make a document correct, consistent, accurate, and complete, using
company standards and guidelines; spelling, grammar, punctuation,
capitalization, hyphenation, legal
 Not negotiable with the writer: the editor makes corrections, enforces the
rules
 Analysis-based editing
 Make a document functional and appropriate for readers, focusing on
concepts, content, organization, form, and style
 Negotiable with the writer: the editor suggests improvements, identifies
possible issues

56. 56
Content-focus instead of rules-focus (Nadziejka)
 Non-sequential, independent list of three levels; all deal
with “traditional editorial concerns of language, grammar,
format, and style, but also with the technical content”
 Lowest level of edit must include focus on content and
purpose, not just on grammar and style (or less); limited
time should not mean that we limit our focus on the content
 Trade-off: Some typos or grammatical errors will exist
within a document
 “For technical documentation (by which is meant
intellectual, scholarly, or highly complex documents in any
field), the primary focus must be to help ensure that the
technical content is complete, accurate, and
understandable to the intended audience.”

57. 57
Content-focus levels of edit (Nadziejka)
 Rush Edit
 Not enough time for a complete edit
 Selection of editing tasks within the limited amount of time
 “...identifying substantive problems or errors that would adversely affect the reader’s
comprehension and the author’s reputation...”
 Three types of tasks to be completed in order, and as time allows:
 Technical content considerations
 Policy considerations
 Copy editing considerations
 Standard Edit
 Plenty of time to do a complete edit
 Complete editing of the document
 Includes all of the editing tasks in a Rush Edit, but in the order of the editor’s choosing:
 Technical content considerations
 Style considerations
 Language considerations
 Integrity considerations
 Policy considerations
 Revision Edit
 More time-intensive edit
 Bringing several authors together
 Document is not nearing completion, is not yet ready for a Standard Edit
 Involves reorganization and major revisions to document

58. Defining your types of edits
 Must have a clear definition of the standard types of edits you
will complete
 For most uses, the following types are a minimum you need:
 Legal edit – notices, trademarks, copyrights, licenses
 Copy edit – legal edit + “rules-based” errors in style guide,
especially for grammar, style, punctuation, and formatting
 Comprehensive edit – copy edit + “analysis-based” errors,
especially for organization, completeness, logic, and
accuracy
58

59. Characteristics that affect your choice
 Importance of project or release to the business
 Importance of project or release to the customer
 Importance of the information
 Type of information
 Amount of new and changed information
 Quality of existing information
 Experience of the writer
 Availability of resources (editor, writer, SMEs)
 Availability of time
 Globalization and translation of the information
59

60. What type of edit would you choose?
(legal, copy, comprehensive?)
Characteristic of the information Choose this type of editing
Information is critical to customer
Information is important to customer
Information is mostly guidance
Information is mostly conceptual
Information is mostly reference
Information contains known issues
Information is accurate/complete
Writer of information is experienced
Writer of information is new
Schedule allows ample time
Schedule allows minimal time 60

61. Develop a “decision tree”
Characteristic of the information Choose this type of editing
Information is critical to customer Comprehensive edit
Information is important to customer Copy edit
Information is mostly guidance Comprehensive edit
Information is mostly conceptual Comprehensive edit
Information is mostly reference Copy edit
Information contains known issues Comprehensive edit
Information is accurate/complete Legal edit
Writer of information is experienced Copy edit
Writer of information is new Comprehensive edit
Schedule allows ample time Comprehensive edit
Schedule allows minimal time Legal edit
61
 Time and resources are gating factor
 Choose most comprehensive type of all characteristics in decision tree
 Document decisions in editing plan, which should be part of a doc plan

62. Developing a “triage” system (Tarutz)
 Triage = Deciding on the desired quality of the product, and
then how much effort is required to attain that level of quality
 Evaluate a project by rating on a scale of 1 (low) to 3 (high)
the following variables:
 Importance of the project
 Rapport with the writer
 Difficulty of the project
 Add the total points, books with the highest points need more
comprehensive editing
62

63. Final determination…
 Determine what your levels of edit and triage system are for
your work.
 Edit at the optimum type/level for the time and resources.
 Pay attention to content.
 Remember that the organization, the author, and YOU--the
technical editor--are all striving for the same thing: CLARITY.
63

64. 6464
Copy &
comprehensive
editing

65. 6565
Copy editing defined (from Technical
Editing Fundamentals course)
 Markup of language
 Looking at grammar, punctuation, style
 Focusing at sentence-level, word-level
 Rules-based, or rules-focused
 Focus more on these quality characteristics: clarity,
style, visual effectiveness (adhering to style guide and
to rules)
 Can do a copy edit separate from a comprehensive
edit (but a comprehensive edit often includes the copy
edit)

66. 6666
Copy editing – Center of the universe
(Weber)
 Copy editing is interrelated with
all other types of edits
 Focus on clear communication,
not just rules, rules, rules:
 Essential rules – required
for clear, unambiguous
communication
 Nonessential rules – not
required for clarity or
unambiguous
communication
 Fake rules – matter of
choice, our own little
bugaboos
S = Substantive editing
D = Development editing
C = Copy editing
P = Production editing
Pr = Proofreading
U = Usability editing

67. 6767
Copy editing, “bridge from writing to
production” (Rude)
 Correct: spelling, grammar, punctuation
 Consistent: spelling, capitalization, terminology,
visual design
 Accurate: dates, numbers, links, references
 Complete: all parts are present
 Attention to detail, reading closely
 Queries content, but directs on style and form

68. 6868
Copy editing steps, a la Rude
1. Gather information about the project
2. Survey the document overall
3. Run all computer checks (spell checker, grammar
checker)
4. Edit paragraphs and headings for correctness,
consistency, and accuracy
5. Edit illustrations, equations, reference list, table of
contents, front matter, and back matter
6. Prepare the document for production

69. 6969
An editor’s objective findings
 Grammatical mistakes
 Misspellings, typos
 Incorrect punctuation
 Inconsistent usage
 Ambiguous technical information
 Ambiguous titles, index entries
 Wrong scientific terms, conflicting with general scientific
knowledge
 Wrong units and dimensions
 Inconsistent significant figures
 Improper data or chart presentation
 Citation errors

70. 7070
Comprehensive editing defined (also from
TEF course)
 Insert comments about the content
 Check and comment on organization, usability,
logic
 Focus at topic-level, paragraph-level
 Task is more analysis-focused
 Focus more on quality characteristics such as
accuracy, completeness, concreteness,
organization, retrievability, task orientation
 Include copy edit, which might be done by a
separate person

71. 7171
Comprehensive editing, “systematic process of analysis
and applies principles of good writing” (Rude)
 A rose by any other name: substantive editing,
development editing, macro editing, analysis-based
editing
 Analyze the purpose of the document, understand
the readers and their tasks
 Usability – anticipate the user’s needs by imagining
the information in use
 Comprehension – focus on the content,
organization, visual design, and overall style
 Comprehensive editing precedes copy editing, does
not include copy editing (according to Rude, but not
according to us!)

72. 7272
Comprehensive editing steps, a la Rude
1. Analyze the purpose, readers, and uses for the
document
2. Evaluate the content, organization, visual design,
style, and reader accommodations
3. Establish editing objectives and document them in
a specific plan for editing
4. Review the plan with the writer, and work toward
consensus on changes to make

73. 7373
Comparing copy and comprehensive editing
 Copy Editing  Comprehensive Editing
 Scope: Language:
Grammar
Punctuation
Style
Content:
Organization
Usability
Logic
 Focus: Word-level
Sentence-level
Paragraph-level
Topic-level
Entire deliverable
 Based on: Rules-based Analysis-based
 Types of
comments:
Imperatives
Queries
Suggestions
Queries
Imperatives
Opinions (few)
 DQTI quality
characteristic
s:
Clarity
Style
Visual Effectiveness
Accuracy
Completeness
Concreteness
Organization
Retrievability
Task Orientation
 Includes
other edits:
Includes legal editing Includes some copy editing
(some rules-based copy editing,
more analysis-based copy editing
Review these articles from
Jean Weber on her site,
Technical Editors’ Eyrie:
Escape from the grammar trap:
http://www.jeanweber.com/newsite
/?page_id=23
Classifying editorial tasks:
http://www.jeanweber.com/newsite
/?page_id=27
What is substantive editing:
http://www.jeanweber.com/newsite
/?page_id=28

74. Copy edit this:
74
As a result of a Nationl Bureau of Standard’s study of the
problems associated with excavation safety, it has been
concluded that there is a need for a simple soil classification
system that can be used by field supervisors to make rapid
decisions on slopping or shoring requirements. The soil
classification system should meat the following criterion it
should be comprehensive (cover essentialy all the conditions
that could be encountered; it should consider (at least
implicitly) all critical conditions; should be be usable by
construction supervisors and OSHA complience officers’ in the
field with-out the assistance of an supervisoring engineer.

75. What would you do differently if you had to
comprehensively edit the same passage?
As a result of a Nationl Bureau of Standard’s study of
the problems associated with excavation safety, it has
been concluded that there is a need for a simple soil
classification system that can be used by field
supervisors to make rapid decisions on slopping or
shoring requirements. The soil classification system
should meat the following criterion it should be
comprehensive (cover essentialy all the conditions
that could be encountered; it should consider (at least
implicitly) all critical conditions; should be be usable
by construction supervisors and OSHA complience
officers’ in the field with-out the assistance of an
supervisoring engineer.
75

76. And now, your questions?
76

77. 7777
Tech Editing Fundamentals: Session 4 - Your Career--Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow 77
Editors today & in the
future

78. 7878
Editor-Slash Roles
 Taking on additional responsibilities, not just more
editing
 Most common:
 Writer/editor (33% + 26% = 59%)
 Editor/manager (10%)
 Editor/information architect (none reported by Dayton)

79. 7979
Editor/information architect–A perfect fit
 Editor:
 Development editing
 Usability editing
 Terminology management
 Information Architect:
 Organizing and structuring
 Navigation
 Classifying
 Why a perfect fit?
 Knowledge of users, acting as a user
 Knowledge of entire information set

80. 8080
Editors in tomorrow’s world
 Corbin:
 “A fluidity of how information is delivered, including
modular or single-sourcing writing environments”
 “A fluidity of how frequently our information is
published, adopting and adapting to iterative and agile
development processes”
 “Collaborative writing environments, where information
is influenced by the latest Web technologies, allowing
users themselves to add and edit information in
knowledge base, wikis, and blogs.”

81. 8181
Editing in single-sourcing/modular
environments
 Editing for multiple contexts: print, online, multimedia, social,
etc.
 Editing to ensure information can be reused; more focus on
topic-based writing
 Editing across multiple writers, making it sound like it all
came from just one writer
 More focus on content and language, less on layout and
formatting, because XML and tooling taking care of it
 Creating templates
 Editor/architect plays a key role in putting the parts and
pieces together

82. 8282
Editing in agile/iterative environments
 More focus on topic-based writing
 More focus on minimalist writing (don’t have time to
write about it ALL)
 Automating the editing tasks, via spell-checkers,
grammar checkers, or language checkers
 Getting involved earlier and earlier
 Doing more developmental editing, less and less
copy editing
 More writer/editor roles likely, because can’t cover
multiple projects

83. 8383
Editing in collaborative/social environments
 Anyone can be a writer/editor/publisher
 Certain types of information lend themselves more
to this environment: reference, knowledge base,
etc. – less likely to require editing by formal editor?
 Others becoming editors, who care about the
quality of this user-generated content: support
personnel, developers, or marketing
 Editor/architect needed to help structure, navigate,
and find the most relevant information

84. 8484
The reality
 Expectation exists that professionally produced
documentation will be edited
 International outsourcing increases the need
 Clear communication is a valued skill or is it?
84

85. 8585
Writer acting as editor
 Ad hoc appointment
 If editor moves to another group or quits
 Stopgap measure imposed by management
 Political consequences within the group
 Sink or swim for an inexperienced editor
 Opportunity for professional development
 Skills not necessarily the same
85

86. 8686
Manager as editor
 Can work in some situations
 If manager is experienced editor
 If group is new and uncongealed
 If group is small
 Blurs distinction between two very
different roles
 Difficult to allocate time
86

87. 87
Oestreich, (c) 27 Oct 2012
87
Editors and writers
87
Typical editor traits:
 Generalist
 Wide focus (“forest”)
 Short project cycles
 Multiple projects
 General familiarity
with many products
or services
 Likes stability
Typical writer traits:
 Specialist
 Narrow focus
(“trees”)
 Long project cycles
 One project at a time
 Intimate familiarity
with a few products
or services
 Likes “cutting edge”

88. 8888
Editing skill is not enough (Zook)
 Realize that your work is not an end in itself but is
part of a system
 Learn to work, consciously, at many different levels
 Develop a sense of perspective on your own work
 Know that things are not as simple as they may
seem
88

89. 8989
Editor’s relationship to writing
“An editor’s relationship to writing should be the same as a
bartender’s relationship to drinking . . .
s/he should be fond of an occasional drink,
but it shouldn’t be a regular habit.”
(Gordon van Gelder, Night Shade Books discussion area:
http://www.nightshadebooks.com/
discus/messages/378/3395.html?1099195815)
89

90. 9090
From Lola Zook,
one of my favorite mentors:
“A good way to improve editorial skills is to teach
someone else in a one-to-one, tutorial relationship.
With a bright, assertive apprentice who questions
and challenges every aspect of the work, you’ll find
yourself reviewing rules you’ve grown careless
about, looking up items you’ve taken for granted,
sharpening style—all because you had to take a
fresh look at things that had become so familiar you
didn’t even see them any more.”
“Lessons from 50 years Editorial Experience,” Lola Zook, Substance & Style, 1996, EEI
Press
90

91. 9191
Tech Editing Fundamentals: Session 4 - Your Career--Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow 91
Resources &
references

92. 9292
Resources and references
 Baker, Justin. (2008). “Clarity for Editing.” Direction: The Newsletter for the STC Policies &
Procedures Special Interest Group, 2nd/3rd Quarters, 2-3.
 Clements, W. & Waite, R.G. (1983). Guide for Beginning Technical Editors.
STC-112-83. Arlington, Virginia: Society for Technical Communication.
 Corbin, M. and Oestreich, L., Technical Editing Fundamentals. STC Online Certificate
Course. (2011/2012)
 Corbin, M., “The Editor within the Modern Organization,” in A. J. Murphy. (ed.) (2010). New
Perspectives in Technical Editing (pp. 67-83). Amityville, NY, Baywood Publishing Company,
Inc.
 Crystal Clear Proofing: http://www.networkedblogs.com/blog/crystal_clear_proofing/
 Corbin, M., Moell, P., & Boyd, M. (2002). “Technical Editing As Quality Assurance: Adding
Value to Content.” Technical Communication, 49 (3): 286-300.
 Corbin, Michelle. “Effective Editing Comments” Webinar presented to TE SIG in 2009.
 Crognale, Heather. “Long-distance editing: Tips for editors on managing the writer/editor
relationship.” Intercom, July/August 2008, pp. 17-19.
http://archive.stc.org/intercom/PDFs/2008/20080708_17-19.pdf
 Dayton, D. (2003). “Electronic Editing in Technical Communication: A Survey of Practices and
Attitudes.” Technical Communication, 50 (2), pp. 192-205.
 Doumont, Jean-luc. “Gentle Feedback That Encourages Learning.” Intercom. February 2002.
pp. 39-40.
 Doumont, Jean-luc. “Running Group Critique.” Intercom. January 2003. pp. 40-41.
 Dragga, Sam and Gong, Gwendolyn. Editing: The Design of Rhetoric, Baywood's Technical
Communication Series (Amityville, NY: Baywood Publishing Company, Inc., 1989).

93. 9393
Resources and references
 Eaton, Angela; Brewer, Pamela Estes; Portewig, Tiffany Craft; and Davidson, Cynthia R.
“Examining Editing in the Workplace from the Author’s Point of View: Results of an Online
Survey.” Technical Communication, vol 55, no 2, May 2008, pp. 111-139.
 Einsohn, A. (2006). The Copyeditor’s Handbook. Berkeley: University of California Press, p.5
 Ford, Paul. Real Editors Ship, http://www.ftrain.com/editors-ship-dammit.html
 Grove, Laurel K., “The Editor as Ally,” Technical Communication, volume 37, number 3, 1985,
pp. 235-238
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Readability
 Language Portal of Canada. http://www.noslangues-ourlanguages.gc.ca/index-eng.php
 Mackiewicz, Jo and Kathryn Riley. “The Technical Editor as Diplomat: Linguistic Strategies for
Balancing Clarity and Politeness.” Technical Communication, vol 50, no 1, February 2003, pp.
83-94.
 Nadziejka, D. 1999. Council of Biology Editors guidelines number 4: Levels of technical editing.
Reston, VA: Council of Biology Editors
 Nielsen, Jakob., Alertbox: Usability 101: Introduction to Usability
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20030825.html
 Oestreich, Linda. “Editing with heart” workshop presentation to 49th STC Annual Conference,
May 2002
 Pritchard, Laurie N. (1994). “Enhancing the Review Process: Giving and Receiving
Constructive Feedback.” In Proceedings of the Society for Technical Communication’s 41st
annual conference. Arlington, VA: Society for Technical Communication, pp. 32-34.

94. 9494
Resources and references
 Rude, C. D. (2011). Technical Editing (5th ed.). New York: Pearson Longman.
 Sartoris, Brenda E. (1993). Editing to Teach. In Proceedings of the Society for Technical
Communication’s 40th annual conference. Arlington, VA: Society for Technical Communication,
pp. 179–182.
 STC Technical Editing SIG. (2010). “The Value of Levels of Edit.” Corrigo, 11 (1). Available from:
http://www.stc-techedit.org/tiki-index.php?page=The+Value+of+Levels+of+Edit
 STC Technical Editing SIG: “Understanding the Value of a Technical Editor.”:
http://www.stc-techedit.org/tiki-index.php?page=Understanding the Value of a Technical Editor
 Sutcliffe, Andrea. (1994). “Editing” (pp. 579-590). New York Public Library Writer’s Guide to Style
and Usage. New York: Harper Collins.
 Tarutz, J. (1992). Technical Editing: The Practical Guide for Editors and Writers. Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
 The Motion Picture Editors Guild Newsletter, Vol. 19, No. 4, July/August 1998
 Troffer, Alysson M. “Editing Online Documents: Strategies and Tips.” Proceedings from the 49th
Annual STC Conference.
 Van Buren, R. & Buehler, M.F. (1980). The Levels of Edit (2nd ed.).
ISBN 0-914548-67-0. Arlington, VA: Society for Technical Communication.
https://ia800308.us.archive.org/14/items/nasa_techdoc_19800011701/19800011701.pdf
 Weber, J. H. (2002). Classifying editorial tasks. Technical Editors’ Eyrie. Available from:
http://www.jeanweber.com/newsite/?page_id=27.
 Weber, J. H. (2002). The Role of the Editor in the Technical Writing Team. Technical Editors’
Eyrie. Available from: http://www.jeanweber.com/newsite/?page_id=25.
 Weber, J. H. (2002). Who needs a technical editor? Technical Editors’ Eyrie. Available from:
http://www.jeanweber.com/newsite/?page_id=19.

95. 9595
Resources and references
 Weber, Jean Hollis. (2002). Classifying technical editing. Technical Editors’ Eyrie. Retrieved on
January 30, 2011: http://www.jeanweber.com/newsite/?page_id=27
 Weber, Jean Hollis. (2002). Escape from the Grammar Trap. Technical Editors’ Eyrie. Retrieved
on February 13, 2011: http://www.jeanweber.com/newsite/?page_id=23
 Yundt, M. and McMenemy, S. It's In the Numbers: Using Metrics to Plan Documentation
Projects. Available from: http://www.writingassist.com/articles/plan-documentation-projects.htm
 Zook, L.M. (1967). “Training the Editor: Skills Are Not Enough,” STC Conference Proceedings.