Thank you for making this distinction! I've been wrestling with the difference between the kind of structured content I've been talking about, and the kind that tech comms folks talk about. The key is the semantic part -- base content and its structure on meaning and intent, not format.
You're saying we should actually do our jobs and stop phoning it in?
When I took my current position, the so-called user guides were screen descriptions: "Check the 'no widget' box if you don't want a widget." This for a complex piece of software with many ways to work depending on how you set it up. It took a lot of time to clear all that up and I'm still adding process-oriented guides: how-to's, special setups for special functions, tips and hacks.
So now artificial intelligence can take credit for the fact that I bothered to do my job.
AI doesn't use my company's software to know how the program works; it relies on me to do that. The more process-oriented material I write, the more it knows.
In my particular case (documentation not publically available) this is moot, but I can see how maddening it could be. People are using the AI information instead of visiting, say, someone's website or channel to learn it. So, if I'm a DIY blogger, relying on eyeballs to make my living, those eyeballs will never get near my content. AI serves it up to them at the top of the search results.
Thank you for making this distinction! I've been wrestling with the difference between the kind of structured content I've been talking about, and the kind that tech comms folks talk about. The key is the semantic part -- base content and its structure on meaning and intent, not format.
You’re welcome. Thanks for pointing out the distinction is needed. We’re moving in the right direction, just slower than some people desire.
You're saying we should actually do our jobs and stop phoning it in?
When I took my current position, the so-called user guides were screen descriptions: "Check the 'no widget' box if you don't want a widget." This for a complex piece of software with many ways to work depending on how you set it up. It took a lot of time to clear all that up and I'm still adding process-oriented guides: how-to's, special setups for special functions, tips and hacks.
So now artificial intelligence can take credit for the fact that I bothered to do my job.
I am not sure what you mean by AI taking credit for you doing your job. Can you help me understand that comment?
AI doesn't use my company's software to know how the program works; it relies on me to do that. The more process-oriented material I write, the more it knows.
In my particular case (documentation not publically available) this is moot, but I can see how maddening it could be. People are using the AI information instead of visiting, say, someone's website or channel to learn it. So, if I'm a DIY blogger, relying on eyeballs to make my living, those eyeballs will never get near my content. AI serves it up to them at the top of the search results.
That’s an issue for some situations, certainly. We’ll have to see how this all shakes out.