Categories: Theory & Rhetoric, Communication Design, Technology
Summary:
Hart's article on the myths in the field of technical communication has been the subject of conferences and discussion in the field since its publication. He addresses the ideas that are no longer questioned in the field to bring light to their veracity and relevence. Some of the logic and reasoning behind his questioning of the myths is suspect--for example, the idea that templates are sufficient to replace learned formats and skills--but his work creates space for discussion about worthy and important subjects in the field. He acknowledges that myths aren't always invalid, but encourages professional communicators to recognize and understand their limitations.
Citation-worthy:
"Myth #1: Knowledge of specific tools is vitally important ... skills are actually a red herring, because templates already exist and layout or design work consists more of applying the templates. ... Ask yourself which of the two skill sets (writing vs. formatting) is easier to teach, and you'll know [who to hire if you are a manager]" (Hart, 2000, pp. 292-293).
"Myth #2: Sans serif fonts are more legible online. ... [There are typographic factors that can overwhelm the choice of serif versus sans serif typefaces [including], but not limited to: ... [which] sans serif [is chosen], ... line spacing ... line width ... word and character spacing ... type size ... [and] contrast" (Hart, 2000, pp. 293-294).
"Myth #3: Audiences are static. ... How else will our audience change over the next two decades? The only way to find out will be to keep our eye on them and start assessing how their needs are changing" (Hart, 2000, p. 294).
"Myth #4: Minimalism means keeping text as short as possible. .... The minimalist philosophy involves understanding what your audience is trying to accomplish (audience and task analysis), and focusing on those need by providing enough information, in the right form and at the right time or the right place, to help them accomplish their tasks [not just brevity and simplicity" (Hart, 2000, pp. 294-295).
"Myth #5: The optimum number of steps in a procedure is 7 plus or minus 2. ... We should always go to the source rather than blindly accepting someone else's report of what the source said" (Hart, 2000, p. 295).
"Myth 6: You can make a bad interface easy to use through superior documentation. By definition, really good documentation makes even the worst interface easier to use--but it will never make a truly bad product easy to use" (Hart, 2000, p. 295).
"Myth 7: We can't talk to the SMEs. Myth #6 arises from the misperception that we can't talk to our subject-matter experts (SMEs) or development teams and persuade them to make necessary changes" (Hart, 2000, p. 296).
"Myth 8: Usability testing is prohibitively expensive and difficult. ... [It] need not be... Test your questions and the test themselves with a colleague, then determine whether you can analyze the answer efficiently and extract useful information. ... " (Hart, 2000, p. 296).
"Myth 9: Single-sourcing means dumping printed documents online. ... Indeed, the very word 'scrolling' speaks eloquently about how badly this design serves our audience, for if scrolls were such a good communication tool, why then did we abandon them in favor of bound books? (Hart, 2000, p. 296-297).
"Myth 10: Documentation is a cost center. ...
