Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
tables, mathematics, use of multiple fonts and sizes, and cross-references to figures,
tables, equations, sections, and bibliographic entries. Most authors of technical
papers find at one stage or another that they must contend with the limitations of
word-processing software.
Further problems are presented by the lifecycle of technical papers. For example,
a paper might initially be drafted for circulation amongst colleagues, revised for
submission to a conference, then accepted after further revision and experiments;
but, because the paper is too long, some text must be omitted. Subsequently, after
rethinking, new work, and reintroduction of omitted text, the paper is combined
with a report on earlier work and submitted to a journal, where, after revision to meet
referees' comments, it is accepted, perhaps as long as three years after the initial draft
was written. Word-processors need to be able to handle this high level of revision
and re-organization.
There are, broadly speaking, two kinds of word-processor, the visual or WYSI-
WYG style typified by Microsoft
R
Word, and the compiler style typified by L
A
T
E
X,
which compile marked-up text into a page description language such as PostScript.
The visual word-processors are generally superior at production of documents for
immediate use such as letters and Web pages, and for first drafts, but for technical
writing the compiler word-processors are preferable. The compiler word-processors
have features such as transparent methods for commenting-out text, making omission
and re-inclusion straightforward, and macro facilities that make it easy to generate
multiple distinct documents (such as a conference version and a more complete tech-
nical report) from one source file. Documents produced with visual word-processors
can look amateurish, particularly if mathematics is involved.
The L
A
T
E
X word-processing system was used for this topic, and is today arguably
the best word-processor for technical writing. The first edition was written under
Unix; the second edition was written under both Unix and Windows; the third was
written under Linux, Windows, and Mac OSX. There are many circumstances in
which I choose to use a visual word-processor, but technical writing is not among
them.
An “Editing” Checklist
Are all of the components present: title, authors, abstract, and so on?
Are the acknowledgements complete and accurate?
Is the ordering of material correct?
Are the titles and headings consistent with the content?
Have all terms been defined?
Is the style of definition consistent? For example, were all new terms introduced
in italics, or only some?
Has terminology been used consistently?
Are defined objects always described in the same way? For example, if you use
the expression “all regular elements
E
” when introducing a concept, but the
