TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Swaggin' for Dollars From:Mpschiesl -at- ra -dot- rockwell -dot- com To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Tue, 11 Apr 2000 08:45:00 -0500
Otherwise, you could put a little note/tutorial in the
side bar when there is something confusing for
newbies. In my experience/opinion, side notes
are pretty effective for expressing particular info,
and I believe that they help people absorb info
faster than just relying on line upon line upon line
upon line (...) to get your point across.
> > >> need. If they are much more experienced they may think the docs are
a bit
> > >> simple/condescending/whatever then they will skim read the docs and
STILL
> > >> get the info they need.
>Eric Ray wrote:
>
> Do you _know_ this, or is this speculation? It sounds really good (and is
> soothing
> to tech writer's ears), but I'd like to see some usability studies that
> verify or disprove it. I know that in my case, if I start glossing over
> the "Choose File->Open, then in the Open Dialog box enter the name of the
> file you want to open in the File Open field, then click Enter"
information
> (when "Open blah" would have sufficed), I usually end up missing the
information
> I really needed and have to reread three or more times to get it.
> In the case of these particular docs, I grin and bear it, but if I'd
purchased
> a product or book, I'd be quite dissatisfied (and the person who wrote
> the docs would squirm while watching me use them).
>One alternative is to include the basic information in a way that the
>expert won't miss critical non-basic information. For some
>materials, this can be handled with a separate chapter for
>beginners (e.g., an introductory chapter or an appendix).
>For information that must be followed sequentially, the information
>can be arranged to make it easy for the expert user to skip over the
>basic information. For example, headings can guide the expert's
>eyes to the next point after basic information.
