Lesson 7: Editing And Reviews
You might think the process of technical writing is complete once you put the last word on the page, but it isn't. Every document needs to be reviewed and edited. In some cases you'll be fortunate enough to have an actual editor in place to edit your document, but most technical writers must rely on another technical writer or even do it themselves. In addition to the normal editing tasks of checking grammar, general word usage, and spelling, technical editing includes several other elements including checks for consistent word usage, checks that a consistent audience is maintained, and checks that the organizational choices make sense.
Reviewing often occurs at the same time as the editing process but it serves a very different purpose. While editing ensures a clean grammatically correct document with consistent style, it doesn't test the accuracy of the content in any way. Reviewing does. If possible, you should have at least one of the developers who wrote the product participate in a review as well as at least one person who fits the target audience profile. If the person within the target audience doesn't understand everything you wrote then even if it's accurate you haven't successfully met your mandate and need to re-write the document accordingly. If the developer finds inaccuracies or points out areas where the product was changed then similarly you need to fix those before declaring the document finished.
Working with an editor
If you work in a large organization chances are you'll have one or two editors who need to sign off on your documentation before its published. These editors check your books for spelling mistakes, incorrect grammar, flow, and other general common writing problems. They also check for proper use of trademarks, adherence to the corporate style, consistency, widow and orphan lines, pagination issues, and other features that might be specific to your particular company or department.
You might think proper grammar provides a concrete set of rules that leave no room for interpretation but that's not the case. The hardest part of working with different editors is that each has his or her own slightly different interpretation of the rules. The rules regarding commas, for instance, are flexible. I've worked with editors who saw commas as the enemy and eliminated as many as humanly possible without altering meaning and I've worked with people who prefer to include commas every single instance it's possible to do so. Both are correct - it's all a matter of preferred style. Until you learn the style of a new editor expect some growing pains.
The single most important thing to remember when working with editors is that they do not, in general, understand the subject matter of the books they're editing. They do, at times, unwittingly suggest changes that alter your meaning. It is your responsibility to go back to the editor and point this out. Just because an editor requested a specific change does not automatically mean you must make it. If it's a bad change in your opinion, discuss it with the editor and explain why you feel your way is better. Any editor worth their salt will sacrifice their rules or strictly correct grammar for accuracy.
