OT - Who should be responsible for proofing?

[Gillian Flato]

I think that their are two kinds of Technical Proofing/Editing.

1.  Technical/Functional Editing - This is performed by the SME. It is
to check that all of your technical facts are correct. This could be QA
engineers, Software Programmers, or like at my company, PH.D scientists.
(Most of the people in this category, at my company, are ESL and cannot
check the English.)

2. Writing Editing - This is performed by another Technical Writer or an
Editor. It is to check your English (or whatever language you write in),
grammar, spelling, flow and technical writing. (Most of the people in
this category, at my company, are not Engineers and can't check the
facts, only the writing).

Both sets of people need to proof your docs and check for what falls
under their expertise.


Thank you,

Gillian Flato


-----Original Message-----
From: framers-bounces+gflato=nanometrics.com at lists.frameusers.com
[mailto:framers-bounces+gflato=nanometrics.com at lists.frameusers.com] On
Behalf Of Shmuel Wolfson
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 5:30 AM
To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
Subject: Re: OT - Who should be responsible for proofing?

The writer should read it over, but IMHO someone else should also read 
it. It's hard for the same person to catch all the mistakes and
ambiguities.

Regards,
Shmuel Wolfson


Steve Rickaby wrote:
> An interesting discussion, and you all make very valid points. Here in
the UK some of the folks I work with still make the traditional
distinction between copy-editing and proofreading that dates from the
days of hot metal. However, the terms are becoming blurred, and this is
causing some confusion. 
>
> This confusion become damaging when it results in a final production
process that misses the fact that the proofer has no content knowledge.
It also leads to the question of whether *copy-editing* can be performed
in any effective way by someone without content knowledge: my contention
is 'no', but in fact this is often what happens... 'copy-editing' is
confused with 'proofreading'.
>
> I believe that it *is* possible to effectively edit and proof your own
work, but it is hard, and requires a substantial mind-shift. I agree
that it is certainly not desirable, but sometimes it cannot be avoided
for cost or other reasons.
>
> Story: some time ago I was commissioned to write a book. After writing
it, I lightly copy-edited it as time allowed. The publisher then sent
the Ms to a trained freelance proofreader (or, as I thought,
copy-editor). I applied their corrections. Some time later I was
reworking the material and found some glaring errors, so I carried out a
complete reproof and analysis. I was quite shocked at the number of
undiscovered errors I found. Some were typos, some were technical. It
turned out that the proofreader had little or no understanding of the
content.
>
> I suppose the moral is that sometimes things don't turn out as you
expect even if you do everything 'right'.
>
>   
_______________________________________________


You are currently subscribed to Framers as gflato at nanometrics.com.

Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
or visit
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/gflato%40nanometrics
.com

Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.


This message (including any attachments) may contain confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose. If you are not the intended recipient, delete this message. If you are not the intended recipient, disclosing, copying, distributing, or taking any action based on this message is strictly prohibited.