Technical Editing of Knitting Patterns

Pattern writing is a lot like computer programming, including that it is an inherently error-prone process. Just like computer programming where testing is used to find errors, before you publish a knitting pattern, you need to get expert help finding the errors that you are simply not going to see on your own.

My first independent patterns were written and tested on Ravelry by a group of free, volunteer testers. I naively thought this would find all the errors. But a surprising number of patterns still had errors after testing by 5 to 8 people. I have had many testers who have not reported any issues during testing of patterns that after publishing were found to contain several errors. Testers are expected to report errors, and many of them do, but some testers are very advanced knitters and will simply work around the errors in order to complete the project and move on to the next test.

When writing patterns for magazines, they were always edited by a Technical Editor (TE) from the magazine. I consider these to be experts in pattern writing and I learned from their comments and suggestions. Technical Editing, because it is a human activity, is not going to find every mistake, but it is better than testing because the editor considers it her responsibility to remove errors and has demonstrated aptitude for correcting patterns and may have received formal training

Selecting a Technical Editor

I wanted to use a TE who I knew was good. I had worked a lot for one particular magazine, so I asked one of their freelance TE’s to work with me on the book. We talked terms and came to an agreement. But after working on a couple of my patterns she went AWOL; and I never heard from her again. After a month of trying to reach her I realized that I was going to have to find a new TE. I had worked with another TE from an online knitting magazine who I thought was also very talented, so I contacted the editor of that magazine and asked permission to contact her, and she gave it. This TE had only edited one pattern of mine, but it contained some errors that I couldn’t see, and I recalled how patient and kind she was about pointing them out. Based on this interaction I thought that we would work together well.

I was lucky that I already had some relationships with TE’s. Had this not been so, I would have searched on Ravelry TE’s and asked for references. It would probably have also been wise to try them out on an example pattern.

Working with the Technical Editor

Some of the things that my TE has done that are part of what a normal TE does are:

• Review the pattern and point out errors in math and technique

• Point out violations of the Style Guide,

• Suggest revisions to awkwardly or incorrectly worded pattern text

• Identify errors in charts

• Identify incorrect organization of the pattern

• Make sure abbreviations are being used correctly.

My TE has gone well above this by really doing everything she can to shore up my weaknesses, including: suggesting better names for the designs, helping with Pattern Romance (although she says this not her thing but I think she is better than she thinks), developing and adding to the Style Guide, abbreviations, and technique glossary, suggesting improved constructions for the designs, adding to the front-matter of the book, and using her creativity and organization skills in myriad ways to help improve the book. She is also extremely responsive and fast with her edits. I feel very fortunate and I really see this book has been a collaboration between me and the TE.

All of the blanket patterns in the book were TE’ed before the samples were knit. To start this process I emailed my TE the draft pattern, a spreadsheet containing all the math, the Powerpoint file which had all the figures and contained additional design diagrams that were not in the pattern, charts of the pattern stitches, and photos of the front and back of the swatch I had knitted to demonstrate feasibility of the main design elements.

TE’ing the typical pattern took between 2 and 4 days during which the pattern was mailed back and forth between me and the TE. With change tracking on we alternately made changes, inserted comments, and responded to comments. Every time I received the pattern back from the TE I reviewed the TE’s changes and accepted all that I approved of (usually most of them) or rejected the change and explained why. I also deleted resolved comments. This cleaning up of past comments and changes helped us maintain focus during the next round of editing. After passing the pattern back and forth between 5 and 10 times, there were no more comments being raised and no further edits either of could think to make to improve the pattern.

Keeping Track of Files

During the mailing of the pattern back and forth we used a file naming procedure that made it easy to identify the pattern. Every time one of us edited the pattern we appended our initial to the end of the filename. This allowed us to see who had touched the file last, and when files were sorted alphabetically A-Z in a directory, the last file touched was at the bottom of the list. This simple naming scheme allowed us to dispense with version numbers at a point in the life cycle of a pattern when a versions don’t need to be formally tracked. When we were ready to turn the pattern over to the sample knitter, we stripped off all the initials and named it Version 1. Thereafter we incremented the version number every time we changed the pattern.

We could have shared files on Dropbox or Google Documents, but honestly, emailing them has worked just fine.

Next Post in the Series: Photography … which we are still doing

Previous Post in this Series: Writing Knitting Patterns