jtchew@csa2.lbl.gov (JOSEPH T CHEW) (03/08/91)
This is the first call for discussion, prior to a formal Call for Votes, for SCI.TECH.COMM. Followups are directed solely to news.groups (the newsgroup about newsgroups). Strawman Charter ----------------- SCI.TECH-COMM is a venue for scholarly and applied discussion of all aspects of technical communication. For this purpose, technical communication is broadly defined. Our definition centers on the use of the printed or spoken word to inform, instruct, or request action in any area of science, engineering, or technology. However, many other fields are closely allied to technical communication, including: * User interface design and human factors. * Technical marketing communication. * Linguistics. * Communicative aspects of cognitive psychology. * Management science. * Technology applications, including both tools and venues (hypermedia, multimedia, data networks, etc.). * Science and technology journalism. SCI.TECH-COMM also welcomes those who seek advice about specific problems in technical communication, as well as questions about academic programs and related opportunities for skills development. Why a New Group/Why a Sci. Group -------------------------------- Some recent traffic on news.groups indicates an interest in technical communication. There appear to be no existing groups that are even a moderately good fit for this subject matter. Comp.text and comp.editors discuss writer's tools but, apparently, no other aspects of technical communication. Alt.prose and the corresponding discussion group alt.prose.d appear to be almost entirely devoted to fiction. Several other likely-sounding groups proved to be blind alleys; for example, alt.books.technical is for people searching for books, and comp.documents is a bibliographic group. The range of interest is diverse. One of the major areas of professional activity in technical communication is, of course, the computer industry, where related activities include documentation (both paper and online), training, and user-interface design. The aerospace industry is another user of, and influence in, this field. However, technical communication is of interest in any science or engineering discipline. Technical communication has also become an active scholarly pursuit, with the primary growth occurring in the last decade. Programs through the PhD are available in the US and elsewhere. Active areas of scholarly investigation include the rhetorical nature of technical communication; measures of effectiveness of media, rhetorical devices, and strategies; and various aspects of international/intercultural communication. Interest in the field supports three major scholarly journals (Technical Communication, the IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, and the Journal of Technical Writing and Communication) and at least three professional societies (the IEEE Professional Communication Society, the Society for Technical Communication, and the Association of Computing Machinery's SIGDOC). While it is arguable whether technical communication can be regarded as a single, cohesive "science," it is inarguable that scholarship in the field interacts with and benefits from a number of sciences, most notably psychology and linguistics. It is also inarguable that a great deal of the professional activity is done by or for scientific and engineering organizations. It appears that placing the proposed group in the "sci" hierarchy would, at once, best reflect the intellectual status of the discipline, best guide the desired content of the group's traffic, and best reach the desired audience. Moderated or Unmoderated? ------------------------- I propose setting up SCI.TECH-COMM as an unmoderated newsgroup. The field does not attract great public commentary. The tone and content of postings should serve to encourage a scholarly and helpful atmosphere without a moderator. Where to Go from Here -------------------- Followup discussion is directed toward news.groups. I would also welcome E-mail (JTCHEW@lbl.gov). I have the action item of monitoring and recording the discussion. If there appears to be sufficient interest, I will put out a call for votes, according to the standard Usenet procedures. My plans for development of the group, should it be formed, include publicizing the group to a wide variety of personal and professional contacts in the academic and industrial technical-writing communities. Feel free to pass this discussion along, in soft or hard copy, to other current and potential network users who have an interest in this subject. In conclusion, it seems that SCI.TECH-COMM could be both a valuable asset to the Usenet community and a useful venue for advancing the art and science of technical communication. Shall we discuss it further? --Joe JTCHEW@lbl.gov