RE: Dynamic GUI = Dynamic Documentation?

["Glenn Maxey" <glenn -dot- maxey -at- voyanttech -dot- com>]

This isn't really an answer to your question. It is just a seed.

<IMHO>
>From the perspective of most users, dynamic applications aren't. That is
to say, they don't use them that way to nearly the extent that they
could, if at all.

Case in point: how many times have you seen someone using a browser who
didn't even bother changing the default unvisited/visted link colors
from the hard-to-read blue/purple or link underlining? How many times do
they regularly turn toolbars on and off?

How many times have you customized the toolbars provided to you by MS
Word? I'm not referring to adding buttons with my macros; I'm referring
to customization of a standard Word toolbars by, say, removing the
printer icon because it by-passes the all too frequently needed dialog
box where you specify printer and number of copies. My answer to this is
"rarely." 

I mean, I have done it in the past. But then I get a software upgrade, a
new computer, or both at a new job. Or something crashes and I have to
do a re-install. Either way, sooner than I expected I have to go through
all of this damn customization again. And then there are times when
changes aren't remembered. I don't know how many times I've told MS Word
to stop highlighting what it thinks are grammar or spelling errors
(practically every other word when documenting APIs) or for Clippy to
shut-the-&*$%-up!

I get tired of it and say "to hell with it" unless it is really in my
face and ugly. For the most part, I leave things well enough alone
anymore, which also facilitates others when they come to use my machine
-- not that this is a priority.
</IMHO>

Just because you can customize the beegeesus out of something doesn't
mean that a majority of users will. It doesn't mean that application
developers still shouldn't come up the best possible default GUI which
customers can use right out of the box and be satisified leaving as-is.

My seed (possibly to your sanity) is that when application developers
don't short-shrift this effort into a best-in-show default and when the
tech writers hold them to it, then documentation is easier. The docs aim
all descriptions to the default best-in-show and then let the customers
worry out finding things after they have tweaked their GUI beyond
recognition. At the very least, your documentation won't have to hit as
big of a moving target.

<rant deleted> :)

Glenn Maxey
Voyant Technologies, Inc.
Tel. +1 303.223.5164
Fax. +1 303.223.5275
glenn -dot- maxey -at- voyanttech -dot- com



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Floyd [mailto:Floyd -at- ORsoftware -dot- com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 12:18 PM
> To: TECHWR-L
> Subject: Dynamic GUI = Dynamic Documentation?

> I am preparing to document a new subset of our software 
> application that uses dynamic GUI - a means that allows our 
> users to build their own interface screens

> Has anyone else out there documented a dynamic GUI 
> application?  Is there a
> better way of describing a software application that can be 
> totally set up by users? 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

*** Deva(tm) Tools for Dreamweaver and Deva(tm) Search ***
Build Contents, Indexes, and Search for Web Sites and Help Systems
Available now at http://www.devahelp.com or info -at- devahelp -dot- com

A landmark hotel, one of America's most beautiful cities, and
three and a half days of immersion in the state of the art:
IPCC 01, Oct. 24-27 in Santa Fe.  http://ieeepcs.org/2001/

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.