<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ten New Year&#039;s Resolutions for Technical Writers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.gryphonmountain.net/2010/01/ten-new-years-resolutions-for-technical-writers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.gryphonmountain.net/2010/01/ten-new-years-resolutions-for-technical-writers/</link>
	<description>Technical Communication and Other Writing Topics, by Ben Minson</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2012 04:05:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Haitham Razagui</title>
		<link>http://www.gryphonmountain.net/2010/01/ten-new-years-resolutions-for-technical-writers/#comment-437</link>
		<dc:creator>Haitham Razagui</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Jan 2010 09:40:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gryphonmountain.net/?p=829#comment-437</guid>
		<description>Point three is risky because it&#039;s hard enough getting our own documents reviewed, without perpetuating it by not returning the courtesy to the PM :) I&#039;ve finally managed to get a PM to add the documentation review process to their project plan, but it only allocates my time, rather than that of the people who are supposed to be reviewing the docs! The time I need to borrow from them for information gathering purposes is also missing. One day we&#039;ll get there...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Point three is risky because it&#8217;s hard enough getting our own documents reviewed, without perpetuating it by not returning the courtesy to the PM <img src='http://www.gryphonmountain.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />  I&#8217;ve finally managed to get a PM to add the documentation review process to their project plan, but it only allocates my time, rather than that of the people who are supposed to be reviewing the docs! The time I need to borrow from them for information gathering purposes is also missing. One day we&#8217;ll get there&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Directions I’m Going in 2010 &#124; I'd Rather Be Writing - Tom Johnson</title>
		<link>http://www.gryphonmountain.net/2010/01/ten-new-years-resolutions-for-technical-writers/#comment-436</link>
		<dc:creator>Directions I’m Going in 2010 &#124; I'd Rather Be Writing - Tom Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 2010 07:37:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gryphonmountain.net/?p=829#comment-436</guid>
		<description>[...] Given that it&#8217;s a new year, a lot of people are writing about trends and predictions in technical communication. Ellis Pratt at Cherryleaf has an interesting post on the Top 10 Trends in Technical Communication for 2010. Larry Kunz has a post on Technical Communication Trends in 2010. Sarah O&#8217;Keefe chimed in with 2010 Predictions for Technical Communication. And Ben Minson has Ten New Year&#8217;s Resolutions. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Given that it&#8217;s a new year, a lot of people are writing about trends and predictions in technical communication. Ellis Pratt at Cherryleaf has an interesting post on the Top 10 Trends in Technical Communication for 2010. Larry Kunz has a post on Technical Communication Trends in 2010. Sarah O&#8217;Keefe chimed in with 2010 Predictions for Technical Communication. And Ben Minson has Ten New Year&#8217;s Resolutions. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

