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.
Actually, we know for a fact that some 85+% of our customers
never use the GUI-based tool, but continue to use our UNIX
command-line SW or their own internally developed ones to insert
our products. A common joke (at least I think it's a joke) in our
industry is "Real chip design engineers don't need no steenk'n GUIs."
The numbered-tab doc is even less used, as the majority of those
who do use the GUI-based tool are getting the same information
that's in the callouts from the balloon popups in the tool itself. The
book is a leftover relic that is primarily used in training classes and
as a sales handout by people who haven't actually gotten the SW
yet, and lately we have been discussing whether or not the book
should be discontinued altogether. It will probably bite the dust
when/if the SW folks get round to finishing the CD-based demo
they've been talking about doing for some time now.
But to answer your question, yes, our customers do notice that less
effort goes into the docs and GUI SW, and I think most of them
think that it's still too much compared to the effort they want us
to spend delivering our "main product" and the documentation
we produce for it.
Gene Kim-Eng
"Chuck Martin" <cm -at- writeforyou -dot- com> wrote in message news:...
> I have never liked illustrations that use numbered arrows and then a
> separate key to desribe what each number points to. Why create that
> extra cognitive load when you could design an illustration (in many
> cases) where the callouts themselves do the explanation?
>
> Using phrases such as "this tab" can be OK if you're sure that users
> know what you're referring to, that they will not go away and be in,
> say, onther tab when they get to that part of the content.
>
> And I have to ask: Do you think customers notice not as much effort on
> the software docs (and is there less effort on the that software too),
> and if so, doyou think they might actually ask themselves that if
> there's not much effort put into those part, how can they be confident
> that effort *was* put into the "main" product?
WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT - EDIT AND REVIEW, REDEFINED
Accelerate the document lifecycle with full online discussions and unique feedback-management capabilities. Unlimited, efficient reviews for Word
and FrameMaker authors. Live, online demo: http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l
Technical Communication Certificate online - Malaspina-University College, Canada. Online training in technical writing, software (FrameMaker, RoboHelp, Dreamweaver, Acrobat), document & web design, writing manuals, job search. www.pr.mala.bc.ca/tech_comm.htm for details.
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
