My organisation is developing a suite of web-based applications that sit alongside our legacy products, and I’ve created ‘user assistance’ using all the above formats above since for some aspects, it’s the ideal medium. But 70% of what I write requires a level of detail, navigation, cross-referencing, and explanation that is best served in PDF or online help format.

Let’s all remember what the most important aspect of being a technical author is: writing ability. Think about what you look for when recruiting an author; I always chose someone who’s writing skills are strong, as (IMO) it’s easier to teach a good writer about technology than it is to teach a technologist how to write. These emerging technologies should help us make decisions how to instruct our audiences, not define how we want to value our profession.

Almost anyone can write a blog, tweet, create a screencast, and upload content to the web. If that’s how authors should market their abilities, I think we’re seriously underselling the value we can bring to an organisation. After all, does anyone else think that the ability to string sentences, paragraphs and pages together is a dying art? Not to mention indexing, information design, etc.? Good organisations know this, and ambitious authors can usually broaden their appeal by taking on other writing projects within an organisation. Company reports, marketing material, web sites, all require professionally written copy that not many people are good at. I certainly don’t want to avoid extinction/make my living by tweeting and the like, or moderating comments on a forum.

Yes, let’s embrace these technologies, be aware of their benefits, and exploit them where necessary. But more importantly, let’s play to our strengths, and champion the need for professionally produced writing.

Simon

This is perhaps as it should be. Perhaps the role of teaching people how to use technology should pass to the people who create the technology. Perhaps those people should be building the “teaching” directly into the technology itself. Perhaps this is the best way for all of us to help those using the technology.

There is a move afoot in the training and development world to change the role of training departments from delivering training to enabling knowledge to flow in organizations — in part, by having trainers step back from familiar roles and facilitating more self-directed, informal, and “on the go” learning by those who need it. It seems there’s something of this idea in Eliis’ prediction.

I have to produce an output that satisfies all my customers, including those who may have firewalls, don’t let their users use the Internet, have old versions of Word, etc. I’m happy to produce any output, but most customers want PDFs.

Our customers are also heavily regulated so they need electronic forms of our documentation for auditing purposes. This need simply can’t be met by blogs, wikis, webcasts, twitter and RSS feeds.

Flogging technical communicators for not jumping on the latest bandwagon has become a tired subject. I can’t believe we’re still falling for it.