You’re not helping the readers

Your editorial in the July issue (p. 64) was spot-on. You’re right: many authors enjoy showing off their niche knowledge, without tailoring the material to help the readership. Similarly, some authors go on and on about the genesis and technical details of a novel gadget without describing (or possibly not knowing) what it will do, what is needed, or why it’s better than something else.

For example, the article on page 33 (“Machine vision targets semiconductor inspection”) details a bump-height system, with faint reference to the industry’s needs and no description of how this could solve the industry-recognized coplanarity-measurement dilemma. You could have shown how it defines the seating plane; given examples of the GUI, displays of off-plane lows, maverick-highs, missings, and mis-regs; and described locator and image-capture-time and transport features for 1.27 down to 0.4-mm pitch spheres and column ends. The readers are left with a blur of internal detailing, a desire to see what the system will do, and a suspicion that it might not really be all that useful.

For situations like this, I like to stress what something will do and then provide back-up information.

Tom Clifford
Industry consultant, formerly with Lockheed Martin
[email protected]