Re: Judging manuals (by themselves)

Subject: Re: Judging manuals (by themselves)
From: Bonni_Graham_at_Enfin-SD -at- PROTEON -dot- COM
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 1994 09:28:00 EST

Fred asks:
"Could we unknowingly be encouraging the concept of the manual _for_ the
product (instead of the manual _of_ the product)?"

This is a very good point. Maybe we should spend some bandwidth
brainstorming ways to fix it? I'm planing on volunteering to run the 1995
or 96 SoCal Pubs (and maybe Art) competition, so any ideas y'all have on how
to run a comp. more smoothly and fairly would be mucho appreciated.

For example, maybe we should have different subcategories under manuals.
Rather than hard vs. soft and reference vs. user vs. tutorial vs. quick
reference, perhaps they should be by subject matter -- then we could gather
judges who already know the subject? I realize this might require
reorganization up to the international comp. level, but maybe it's time?

Lemming Know, netters...

Bonni Graham |
Technical Writer | Most software is run by
Easel Corporation, ENFIN Technology Lab | confused users acting on
Bonni_Graham_at_Enfin-SD -at- relay -dot- proteon -dot- com | incorrect and incomplete
President, San Diego STC | information, doing things
| the designer never expected.
NOTE: apparently my email address needs |
to be typed exactly as it appears here, | --Paul Heckel, quoted
punctuation and all, or the system gets | by William Horton
upset. |

Previous by Author: Re: While we're on the topic of words . . .
Next by Author: Re[2]: What to say to people who LIKE the passive voice (fwd
Previous by Thread: Re: While we're on the topic of words . . .
Next by Thread: Judging manuals (by themselves)

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads