2 ms·
When I first saw the title I thought to myself, “shit, another random, possibly misleading post about technical writing?” but on quick review this seems to be a
by kaycebasques 7y ago
When I first saw the title I thought to myself, “shit, another random, possibly misleading post about technical writing?” but on quick review this seems to be a well-researched overview of the field. If you were to ask a practicing technical writer to present a summary like this, it wouldn’t differ much.
If the author is here, I’m curious if they took that definition of technical writing from my post? [1] To the best of my memory I feel like I came up with that definition on my own but also wouldn’t be surprised if I subconsciously took it from somewhere else.
[1] https://kayce.basqu.es/blog/metrics/ https://kayce.basqu.es/blog/metrics/
- voidhorse 7y agoAgreed! This was quite refreshing. There's some great advice in this piece. An aside: did you redesign your website, Kayce? I recall it looking quite different in the past. It looks great! I like the aesthetic.
- marcuskaz 7y agoI am here, and I have read several of your posts, thanks for wonderful resource. So yes, it is quite possible I took the definition from you, I collected the various notes over time, so I'm not always positive where they come from.
- leetrout 7y agoPer Google & DDG y'all are the only two, exactly the same, wordings so I'd say they snipped it from you previously, Kayce :)