Technical Editing

Introduction
The definition of technical editing is ambiguous. It could mean anything from simply rearranging commas in a sentence to reorganizing a book-length document. While technical communicators have tried to clear up some of this confusion with terms like “copy editing”, “manuscript writing”, “mechanical editing”, etc., the many duties of a technical editor typically include a combination of these roles and much more.

“Technical communication is–or should be–a set of situations in which rhetorical choices are made. As such, a technical editor isn’t concerned entirely with the mechanical aspects of a text, but the rhetorical aspects as well[1]." The technical editor should take the message, individual situation, purpose, author, and audience and into consideration when determining how language should be used for any given edit. The rhetorical situation for an editor is unique in the way that editors must be able to place themselves in the middle of a situation in which the author/sender is at one end and the reader/receiver is at the other end.[1] Editing becomes an act that occurs between three groups: the editor, the author, and the audience. The editor is expected to anticipate the reaction of the reader as well as preserve the author’s style and character as much as possible. The editor’s behavior can be considered not only as a series of actions but as a series of responses to variables. These variables are usually built in – they must be lived with, coped with, and responded to[2]. Essentially, the technical editor must adhere to the seemingly unbending rules of grammar and, at the same time, adapt to the constantly shifting context of the situation.

Another way that technical editing can be viewed is from the programmatic approach, meaning the application of “correct” grammar, spelling, and punctuation. Other elements such as formal in-house style guides and genre rules also apply to this approach. The programmatic approach assumes only that an editor understands the rules of grammar and punctuation, has the ability to apply these rules, and knows how to interpret and explain the rules when needed[1]. It is the rules, not the situation, that are considered important with the programmatic approach. The roles of a technical editor are most often understood in terms of the programmatic approach.

Levels of Edit
The processes involved in technical editing can become very complex, with different levels of importance placed on different types of edits at different times. One popular approach that is frequently used to help editors organize their workloads and assign tasks is that of levels of edit. The levels of edit approach to technical editing was first conceived by Robert VanBuren and Mary Fran Buehler and developed for NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in their 1980 report Levels of Edit [10]. Since the report’s release, the concept has been utilized, remodeled, and expanded on by technical editors from multiple fields to help facilitate their own work.

Level 1: This is the most thorough edit. It includes all types of edit.

Level 2: This includes all types of edit except substantive.

Level 3: This edit includes the types of edits from coordination to format.

Level 4: This edit includes the types of edits from coordination to screening.

Level 5: This is the least thorough edit. It includes coordination and policy edits only.

The idea of levels of edits in technical editing is that there are levels of importance or attention needed to each edit, with each level examining different elements of content. While VanBuren and Buehler were looking at JPL specifically, the summary of levels of edits has become popular and is often utilized as a platform for other authors to examine and establish their own unique “levels”. The levels are on a numerical scale from 1 to 5. A Level 5 edit, for instance, is the least thorough as the editor is simply verifying the company policy is in place. The levels work their way down the scale until level 1. At a level 1 edit, the editor is exercising the full range of editorial capabilities to produce a “first-class” publication[10]. Levels of edit are determined not only by the importance of the document being edited, but the genre as well.

The types of edit, as presented here, help technical writers and editors break up different elements of editing into more understandable and manageable blocks. They help discern what “style” means. In technical writing, style can be viewed as having four basic functions: editorial (as in a mechanical style edit), typographic (included in a format edit), literary (defined by an authors distinct mode), and usage (as in a language edit) [2]. The terminology of the levels of edit help authors distinguish one type of style from another. The types of edit can help define what a company means when determining what “copy edit” means for them. Most importantly, these types and levels of editing are building blocks for editors in establishing a common vocabulary for which to discuss the various elements of their work.

General History
David Greetham traces the origin of editing to the decision of Peisistratus (560-527 BC) to establish an “official” text of the writing of Homer. It may be that the initial reason for this and similar early edits rooted from distrust about the authenticity of texts and the variants within[7]. In these early days, edits were likely intended to eliminate involuntary errors and deviations that occurred while copying a text. The goal of the edits was to produce a consistently reliable text. The production of editorially stable and reliable text was greatly improved by emergence of the printing press and the publishing industry in the 15th century. Publishing technology allowed for the production of many copies of any given text. This gave “an impulse to textual scholarship[7]" that ushered in the popularity of scholar-editors such as Pietro Bembo (1470-1547) and Aldus Manutius (1449-1515), who sought to improve the language and accuracy of technical publications. The increase in textual scholarship, combined with a strong religious environment calling for more standardized religious texts, brought about the development of “standards of readability”. This standardization, which included a simplification of page layout, unification of spelling and punctuation, and regularization of syntax[11], helped define the basis of modern editorial standards. The increased popularity of international proofreading marks as used by editors in the late 15th century helped ensure that edits were easily understood regardless of an editor's distance from the author and/or publisher.

Style guides, either commercial (such as the Chicago Manual of Style) or created in-house, contain the common rules and editorial standards of different types of documents. Larger businesses often write their own company-specific style guides to ensure brand consistency in addition to following a commercial style guide, while smaller businesses are more likely to simply adhere to a commercial style guide only. While style guides all typically adhere to the standards of readability and grammar, they differ on prescriptive ways to utilize these rules based on genre. The Bluebook is designed primarily for legal writing, for instance, while the Microsoft Writing Style Guide is intended for those in the computer industry. Regardless of genre convention, style guides are important for technical editors in determining the appropriate edits for any given situation. In addition to grammatical conventions, style guides help establish consistency and format.

Traditional vs. Electronic Editing
Traditionally, technical editing was done using hard copy alone, meaning an editor had only a paper and a writing utensil to add comments and proofreading marks. This limited editors in terms of time, consistency, and quality. Collaborative editing, for instance, was difficult to keep in order in terms of whose edits were whose, when they were made, and which ones were going to be ultimately carried out. It also took a substantial amount of time for all edits to make their way back and be implemented by the publisher.

The attitude towards soft-copy editing has gotten more relaxed in recent years. Since the arrival of computers and word processing software in the 20th century, technical editors have worked increasingly with editing software programs and editing electronic copy (also known as soft copy) on a computer screen. Because the popularity of electronic editing involves both on-screen edits and the editing software programs, technical communicators often differ on the definition of what electronic editing is. One inclusive and often accepted view is that electronic editing is any method of suggesting, showing, or making changes to an electronic copy[3]. With the arrival of word processors, computers, and the internet, more and more editors are doing their revisions electronically, often with the aid of electronic editing tools.

One major electronic editing tool many technical editors employ is a text editor. Text editors are computer programs that are capable of editing plain text. Text editors used to be somewhat complex in presentation and difficult to navigate. Now, text editors often come in WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get) format, meaning editors don't' need to know computer science or HTML to perform edits. Text editors allow technical editors to perform a variety of tasks, including formatting, checking spelling and grammar, performing search and replace operations, generating an index, and sending and receiving drafts. These electronic procedures have been shown to benefit companies in terms of version control, archiving, speed, and productivity[4].





While it is increasingly common for technical writers to work with soft copy at some point as part of their regular editorial processes, it has also been shown that the majority of technical writers do still utilize hard-copy editing as well[3]. Despite the arguments for online and soft-copy editing, many editors still might well perceive the interactive responsiveness and tangibility of hard-copy editing to possess inherent advantages over reading and interacting with screen-based text[3]. Many editors, for instance, see the screen’s inferiority to paper in regard to resolution and other viewing factors as being a primary cause for missed typos and other character-level errors[4]. Writers also have had more trouble visualizing the final document when editing-soft copy and often miss using the more traditional markup symbols that have been shown to represent a rich repertoire of editing operations. In addition to the question of whether working with soft-copy is negatively impacting both speed and efficiency of edits, another common concern with electronic editing is that it can contribute to health problems. This includes vision issues, ergonomic stress, motion strain, back pain, and carpel tunnel syndrome[3][4]. These are issues that can potentially be solved by more ergonomic office furniture, more break times, more efficient online editing tools, and occasionally reducing screen time with hard-copy editing. Because the computer has become an integral tool of the workplace, though, it is important for technical editors to learn to incorporate them into their regular workflows and processes.

Instruction
In the past, editing was not often seen as its own entity and was instead viewed as being one of the roles of the writer. For this reason, most 20th century editors had little formal technical communication training and instead were trained in English or journalism[11]. As the perception of the editor role continues to deepen, more and more programs and courses are focusing on editing as its own specific topic.

It has been shown to be useful for instructors to utilize and adjust the traditional levels of edit in the classroom as a jumping off point for students to learn about and explore their own editorial processes. This method also helps students develop a theory as to what editing entails and its significance. More important than any specifically named process or step in the editing process is the idea that students understand that editing techniques typically involve a series of processes. It’s important for students to establish an “editorial dialogue” in which they can clearly communicate suggestions and edits with authors, stakeholders, and other editors[6].

The incorporation of new media and software is also a major theme in modern technical editing education, with the majority of educators promoting a leap into the 21st century along with the development of new and more editor friendly software. As jobs become increasingly technology-based, it is becoming more and more important for editors to understand how to work with different media environments and not just print. There has also been a call for more up-to-date textbooks for technical editing students, as many do not currently discuss multimedia, multi-modality, or electronic editing in the depth needed by students today[5].