: Re: What is in scope for criticizing technical writing I'm not well versed in technical writing. I'm probably not going to be in a position to give anyone feedback for some time, but I would like

@Bryan361

Vote Up Vote Down

The most important criteria for technical writing concern the technical content. They are correctness and completeness, in that order of importance.
After the content criteria, in importance, comes the criterion of clarity.

#1 is about the message to be delivered: the information the writer tries to get across. #2 is about the message delivery: how well the writer gets the message across.

If the content is correct and complete, and if it is communicated clearly, then 99.9% of the job is done. Considerations of language style or correctness that do not detract from message clarity are not so important in most technical contexts. Readers are there for the technical content.

If as a reviewer you are versed in the particular technical area then you can speak to #1 . With respect to completeness you need to have an idea what the scope of the writing is: what "complete" means. This might be clear from the context of the writing, or it might be made clear by the writing itself.

If as a reviewer you are not very familiar with the given technical area then you can at least speak to #2 to some extent.

For both #1 and #2 you need to have an idea whom the writing is for. To judge whether the intended message is appropriate for its audience you need to understand the content and know something about what the audience knows and is interested in.
Judging message clarity requires taking the point of view of an intended reader.

As a reviewer you can pretty much always help by providing some feedback about completeness and clarity. If you can't judge the completeness you can at least ask what the scope is, if that isn't clear. Asking the writer things about the intended message and pointing out what is unclear to you is bound to help.

(0)

Login to post a comment!