Tech writers don’t just write, we frequently also edit what our peers have written. As Tom Johnson recently tweeted:
Can’t decide if the technical editor role is dead or if technical writers have evolved into this role as their new default. 8:40 AM Apr 23rd
I wouldn’t call it a “default role” for us writers, though the “pervasive idea in companies that ‘anyone can write'” creates more demand for this role (paraphrased from another tweet by Tom three hours later).
I’ll gladly edit the work of another tech writer (and rely on their feedback in return), but I’m less likely to “clean this up by noon”: I’m not grammar boy, and if anyone can write, then anyone can also clean up behind himself… If and how I edit depends on the situation. But what do I mean by editing?
(And what do I mean by that photo? Nothing in particular. Except maybe: How do you illustrate editing? :-))
When it comes to technical editing I have three heroes: Robert Van Buren, Mary Fran Buehler, and Jean Weber. Robert and Mary put together the ultimate tech editing guide back in 1980, called Levels of Edit. An STC edition from 1992 is apparently out of print, but there’s still a summary and a PDF version out there. Their booklet is the most comprehensive and best structured guide to tech editing that I know. They distinguish nine (!) types of edit:
- Copy Clarification
- Mechanical Style
Depending on how thorough your task and how much time you have, you go through all or only some of the levels. In fact, they suggest five different levels of edit for different purposes of a document. Unless you create a production edit for a printing house or publisher, you will probably omit types 1 and 5. The others may be more or less relevant, depending on general policies and what kind of document you’re editing.
I find the nine types of edit so clear and well-structured, because they help me to stay consistent and focused in my editing:
- When I do an integrity edit to make sure that the table of contents and index are up to date and show the correct page numbers and that all lists are numbered correctly, then I don’t want to worry about misapplied templates, line breaks, text justification and alignment.
- When I do the mechanical style edit to assure compliance with the corporate style guide, I don’t want to haggle with Oxford commas and dangling participles.
Yes, it does mean that I go through the same document repeatedly, but I find that the additional time spent scrolling or turning pages is made up by the better focus.
Editing the work of others
You can edit your own work, but I don’t recommend it: I find I’m too entangled in my writing, constantly tempted to fix an odd phrase here, a less than perfect table there. If at all feasible, have your work edited by someone else, and edit the work of colleagues.
This is where my third hero Jean Weber comes in (no relation to me): Jean knows all about how to work with editors – or, if you’re an editor, how to work with people who write. She also pointed me towards Levels of Edit.
Jean is in Australia and, according to her website, retired from paid work. But she’s so generous, she shares her knowledge and experience. I found three articles especially helpful:
- Working with a technical editor – where she explains what tech editors (or people filling that role) do and feasible scenarios to use them
- The role of the editor in the technical writing team – where she describes what people expect from editors, what they really do and how they interact with other documentation roles
- Beyond copy-editing: the editor-writer relationship – where she shows how the editing role can be filled successfully
How do you edit? How are your documents edited? Do you edit your own work or someone else’s? Feel free to share issues and insights in the comments.