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.
If I was a user, and purchased a system, and was looking to do something --
because as we know, people only use help when they are trying to accomplish
a task and having difficulties (unless they are the super studious type who
revel in reading all kinds of information) -- I would scan the TOC, maybe
the index (if you have one) and go to those pages. So if you added new
information at the front or back, I would most likely miss it.
You could also present this to your boss: If you start doing addendums and
things of that nature, then at some point you have to do a LOT more work in
one swoop to incorporate all the changes into the main text. Which means he
has to spend a LOT more time signing off on all the various sections in one
go (I'm assuming that's what he does). He probably won't like that idea.
Also: If a person can't find the information they need to do what they need
to do, it's possibly support calls increase, as well as customer
frustration.
Just my 2C.
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Lippincott, Richard
<RLippincott -at- as-e -dot- com>wrote:
> There are both types of changes. Some new optional designs significantly
> change the workflow for systems that have those options.
>
>
>
> --Rick
>
>
> From: Keith Hood [mailto:bus -dot- write -at- gmail -dot- com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 8:14 PM
> To: Lippincott, Richard
> Cc: Techwr-l List (techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com)
> Subject: Re: FW: Usability Studies and Manual Organization
>
> I think the appendix idea is the way to go IF the new material is an
> addition to what's already there. But if it's just a change to something
> the user has already seen, you should keep the current organization and
> edit the content to replace the old content with the new. You want the
> manual to be usable, and for that it must be easy for the user to look up
> what he wants to know. The fewer changes in the manual organization, the
> easier it is for him.
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Lippincott, Richard <RLippincott -at- as-e -dot- com>
> wrote:
> I'm fighting a battle for about the fourth or fifth time here, and I could
> use some studies or documentation to support my point.
>
> To make a long story short (and those of you who know me know how
> difficult this is), we're using printed manuals because that's what the
> customers prefer. When we roll out a variation of a product, if the
> variation is significant enough to change the operator's workflow or
> significantly changes the GUI, I issue a new manual (new part number) keyed
> to that product variation.
>
> There is a program manager here who feels that the best way to handle
> these variations is to stick an appendix or addendum at the end of the
> baseline manual, and let the user flip pages. (The actual truth, which he
> has admitted, is that if we only had one manual to cover all of the product
> variations, his paperwork level would be smaller and he would prefer that.)
>
> I'm sure that someone has done some scholarly work analyzing reductions in
> usability and readability when new data is shoved into an appendix, and
> perhaps even the impact on safety.
>
> Can anyone point me in the right direction?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Rick Lippincott, Technical Writer
> American Science and Engineering, Inc. | www.as-e.com
> 829 Middlesex Turnpike | Billerica, MA 01821 USA | Fax +1-978-262-8702
> Office +1-978-262-8807 | rlippincott -at- as-e -dot- com
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Doc-To-Help: new website, content widgets, and an output that works on any
> screen.
>
> Learn more: http://bit.ly/1eRs4NS
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as bus -dot- write -at- gmail -dot- com -dot-
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
>
> Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
>http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources and
> info.
>
> Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online
> magazine at http://techwhirl.com
>
> Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public
> email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Doc-To-Help: new website, content widgets, and an output that works on any
> screen.
>
> Learn more: http://bit.ly/1eRs4NS
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as hannah -dot- drake -at- formulatrix -dot- com -dot-
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
>
> Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
>http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources and
> info.
>
> Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online
> magazine at http://techwhirl.com
>
> Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public
> email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives
>
--
Hannah L. Drake
Lead Technical Documentation Specialist
Formulatrix, Inc.
781-788-0228 x137 (office)
617-610-6456 (cell)
hannah.drake.formulatrix (skype)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Doc-To-Help: new website, content widgets, and an output that works on any screen.
