RE: POLL: A question of rhetoric (not a rhetorical question)

["Pete Sanborn" <psanborn2 -at- earthlink -dot- net>]

Eric Dunn wrote:
"I wouldn't think that this is a concern. The procedures are (and should be
in all cases) written in such a way that the proper tools and approach are
used."

First, I never said that the procedures should never be written or that
proper tools and procedures be defined.  What I said was that the users
ignore the warnings and cautions, no matter how they are written unless the
information is incorporated within the body text.  That's significant first
hand feedback to an industry that, typically, never gets an opportunity to
get away from their desks to observe users actually using documentation in
the field.  If we document procedures that users ignore, what is the value
of the service we have provided?  Granted, documentation needs to address
all the issues of a product or service in the absence of user feedback but,
when we get productive feedback that allows us to add value to our
documentation through a relatively minor modification that serves the user
better, why wouldn't/shouldn't we do that?

Second, the experience I had in which I observed my documentation in use was
when I was writing documentation to be used by legacy phone company's.  This
included installing equipment in central offices and in remote areas such as
fields and deep holes in the ground.  Also, in my experience teaching
classes telephony and other telecommunications classes, I have noticed that
students will relate lots of safety horror stories about others, but will
ignore their own safety violations.  Anytime safety comes up in a classroom
setting, the students try to duck the topic because they have had their fill
of safety.  That doesn't mean that we don't present the information to them
anyway, but we let them talk about safety experiences that they have had
because a good instructor can use those experiences in his discussion as
examples of where safety procedures fell down or were not followed, etc.,
etc.  The students, by telling the stories, are trying to convince you not
to induce more pain by convincing you that they know all there is to know
about all there is to know about safety.  So far, in my classes at least and
I'm sure in yours, it hasn't worked.  Like you, I am very safety conscious
when it comes to doing installations and working with live equipment and
high voltages, etc.

Regards,
Pete Sanborn


-----Original Message-----
From: bounce-techwr-l-81537 -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
[mailto:bounce-techwr-l-81537 -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com]On Behalf Of
edunn -at- transport -dot- bombardier -dot- com
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 11:30 AM
To: TECHWR-L
Subject: RE: POLL: A question of rhetoric (not a rhetorical question)




<<That's a really good procedure for writing cautions and warnings.
However,
first hand experience with users in the field showed (a long time ago) that,
in documents containing cautions and warnings, the users gloss right over
them and ignore them completely.  When I asked the users why they ignored
the warnings and cautions, I was told that if we wanted them to read the
warnings and cautions, make them part of the body text not a separate
item.>>

I wouldn't think that this is a concern. The procedures are (and should be
in
all cases) written in such a way that the proper tools and approach are
used.
Warnings and cautions are there to underline dangers to personnel or
equipment.

Also add to that, we are writing procedures for railway/transportation
equipment
that involve voltages up to 25 kV and weights that can be in tons. Damaging
something during a procedure may cost thousands of dollars. The audience is
very
aware that warnings and cautions do not serve as decoration. The procedures
are
written so that if followed to the letter no injury should occur. Those that
might stray from procedure do so at their own peril.

When I've given training, I've heard all kinds of stories about what happens
when you don't follow the safety procedures. To get certification to work at
one
authority I had to take safety training that included photos of what happens
if
you get caught in a rail switch or touch the 600 Vdc third rail. Respect for
procedures and warnings is a little higher in such an environment.

Eric L. Dunn





^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Be a published author!  iUniverse gives you: a high-quality paperback, a
custom cover design, and distribution to 25,00 retailers.  Join our almost
10,000 published authors today. http://www.iuniverse.com/media/techwr

  Your monthly sponsorship message here reaches more than
  5000 technical writers, providing 2,500,000+ monthly impressions.
  Contact Eric (ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com) for details and availability.

---
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.