When we want to express something, we are limited by our own level of knowledge. A low level of knowledge can lead to problems—expressions that are not accurate or vague can prevent mistakes, and many people use this method to avoid errors. A high level of knowledge can also create issues—everywhere there are terms that outsiders cannot understand, and the relevant knowledge may not be in the reader's mind, making it difficult for ordinary people to comprehend the expression.
All expressions have their audience. Even simple text requires the audience to be literate and have basic reading skills; toddlers can only understand expressions in picture books. Who is the audience for our writing? Are technical articles meant for people with a higher level of knowledge than the author?
Zhihu#
Today, while browsing Zhihu, I saw a question Why do parents get anxious when explaining problems to their children? - Zhihu.
Because you like to use hyperlinks when you speak, you have a library in your mind, and the information is called from that library, but the child does not have this library. When you send a bunch of hyperlinks, they all fail to call, and what the child hears after a long explanation is all 404 not found.
Words and language themselves are a kind of hyperlink; at least the reader needs to understand the meaning of the words. For example, ==hyperlink== is a somewhat uncommon term. However, we cannot insert a detailed explanation of ==hyperlink== in a lengthy discussion here. Therefore, the audience of this article should have at least some experience with surfing the internet, and those common terms in our eyes do not need detailed explanations.
It is necessary to assess the knowledge level of the audience before writing to avoid situations where readers feel confused or find the content tedious and meaningless halfway through the article.
My Writing#
Looking back, my technical blog posts often assume that the reader is a beginner in a certain technical field. Most blog posts are step-by-step tutorials, where clicking through will always yield the expected results. Without methodological support, I have unconsciously focused on the reader's level of understanding. Proud (‾◡◝)
However, there are still some slightly more in-depth blog posts that require readers to have a certain level of knowledge 1, which necessitates a lot of prerequisite knowledge that many readers do not possess, but without relevant explanations, readers will search for scattered information.
Arrogance and Laziness#
The text in books is often limited by length, and usually, a whole book can only focus on solving one problem, with prerequisite technologies briefly mentioned.
I believe a good article is a one-stop solution. If the problem is at the level of 2, then readers who are not yet at that level should be able to solve the problem through a single article.
Thanks to the software format of presentation, an article can focus on describing the overall process, with prerequisite knowledge and details inserted as hyperlinks in certain paragraphs.
Writing such a good article is time-consuming and labor-intensive, and there is not much benefit; I cannot truly hold myself to such strict standards.
But I believe that this ultimate standard is not problematic. Not doing so is like writing code without comments; if the person reading the code can easily understand it without barriers, then their level is likely much higher than that of the writer.
For technical writing, I do not think "like poetry" is a good evaluation. Poetry is a concise and powerful cultural hyperlink, with interpretations varying from person to person, and its connotations are rich and complex. But for technical writing, my requirement is to describe as precisely as possible; only through countless precise components can a precise technical system be pieced together, ideally without controversies or side effects that leave people scratching their heads.
Clumsy Writing#
Consider yourself a clumsy author and ruthlessly push yourself.
Treat the readers as clumsy readers and write something that even a monkey can understand, like Shakespeare.
This article is synchronized and updated by Mix Space to xLog. The original link is https://www.yono233.cn/posts/white/25_4_3_BungleW
Footnotes#
-
Fire Dragon Fruit Talks Movies invented four levels of Mahjong: Building Roots, Heart Turns Hands, Upper Level, and Ghosts and Gods, with levels gradually increasing. ↩ ↩
-
Fire Dragon Fruit Talks Movies invented four levels of Mahjong: Building Roots, Heart Turns Hands, Upper Level, and Ghosts and Gods, with levels gradually increasing. ↩ ↩