10 Matching Annotations
  1. Sep 2016
  2. techwritingf16.robinwharton.net techwritingf16.robinwharton.net
    1. Clark argues that, while the separation of form fromcontent is not a new concept, “no content is [truly] free of presentation” and that“[c]ontent and presentation are never separated.” Within the content managementcontext, therefore, Clark suggests understanding this separation in two ways: (a) ascontent being complete texts, and presentation being output structure, navigation,and visual style; and (b) as content being content modules, and presentation beingoutput structure, navigation, visual style, and genre definition. This separation,dictated by the nature of structured writing and single sourcing and by the techno-logical nature of content management systems, is perceived in different ways interms of its affordances by different participant groups involved in the contentmanagement process.

      It is important to understand that content and presentation cannot be completely polarized, because in many rhetorical situations the medium is also the message.

    2. For a content management system to be successful, Hall (2001) argues, two im-portant factors must be emphasized: end users (documentation specialists) anduser needs.

      To produce the most efficient system, these two components must be at the forefront of those creating it. To avoid information not needed and disturbing the text, user needs is important. And to avoid confusion with interface and such things, the end user has to be taken into account.

    3. as far as we know, books on content manage-ment systems have almost exclusively approached the topic from the practical per-spective. In other words, they teach you how to design and/or use such systemswithout critical examinations of why such systems should be used in the first placeand why they succeed or fail. Nor do they consider what effect working in such en-vironments has on writing as a practice

      It would not be enough to simply rationalize content management because it only answers the "how" from a practical perspective. A critical examination is also needed.

    4. “the process of coming to content management touches nearly everythingabout the culture of writing in an organization, beginning with how texts are under-stood and encompassing every step of the text generation life cycle up to and in-cluding the way a text should behave when a user interacts with it.” More impor-tantly, they argue, organizations should view content management “as a change inthe technological and social infrastructure that makes their organization work.”

      The piece discussed "Coming to Content Management" shows the benefits of content management in different environments. The only problem is getting everyone on the same so that this type of efficiency can actually be produced.

    5. A potential solution to this problem, proposes Whittemore, can be found inthe heart of technical communication theory—the rhetorical tradition—and, morespecifically, the rhetorical canon of memory. To Whittemore, the rhetorical canonof memory’s “concern for retrieving and adapting existing knowledge to the exi-gencies of shifting rhetorical situations” provides valuable insights into tacklingsome of the contemporary issues confronting content management: “contentcustomizability and granularity, information retrieval, and on-demand delivery.”

      Memory is always an important canon mentioned when discussing literacies. The art of remembering and applying are always intertwined concepts.

    6. The very expressioncontent managementexcludes any idea of writingor communicating and focuses on information independently of the people whoproduce or consume it.

      As noted earlier, the main focuses when dealing with content management is the end result and the end user. Because technical communicators are seen as the end users, but are not involved in the development process, and then furthermore, their skill of writing and communication is not even mentioned in the name and concept, the relationship between the two can become tricky.

    7. Content manage-ment, no doubt, is still a relatively new area within the academic circle, although itis by no means a new practice in the industry.

      Because it is a newer field of study, content management cannot completely be figured out in one article. But posing questions like these "why's" and "how's" mentioned are essential to progressing and fixing the quirks between technical communicators and these systems.

    8. Content management, broadly defined, refers to the “process of collecting, manag-ing, and publishing information to whatever medium you need” (Boiko, 2005, p. xv).A content management system, then, is any systematic method designed to organizeand distribute information, while content management system software automatesthe system, typically providing “a platform for managing the creation, review, filing,updating, distribution, and storage of structured and unstructured content”

      In order to understand Pullman and Gu's points on rationalizing and rhetoricizing content management, it must first be defined. Although the definitions were general, they were necessary. And the detail to make sure the reader understood the difference in simple content management versus its systems helps to better understand the overall article.

    9. The authors here in-vestigate not just thehowfor content management but thewhy, not just to rational-ize the content management practice and our participation in the practice but torhetoricize such practice, i.e., to construct and deconstruct the discourse surround-ing content management and to contextualize the design and implementation ofCMSs for the benefit of not only the end result—information design and dissemi-nation—but also the end users—technical communicators.

      It is important for Pullman and Gu to mention not only the constructing of the discourse involved in content management, but also destruct. To fully understand a concept and answer the "why" of content management, I think that both are required.

    10. plementation in business settings, and sadly in university settings as well, involvesonly managers and IT personnel such as developers. The most important part ofthis whole puzzle—th

      This seems to be the major problem of trying to ratilionalize content management systems. If the end users are not involved in important like design and development, it will pose a major problem when they are expected to use these technologies.