Re: 3-ring binders

["Virginia L. Krenn" <asdxvlk -at- OKWAY -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU>]

     Kim,

     Don't give up on the idea of using three-ring binders.

     If you feel that the binders themselves are too expensive, just do
     what IBM has been doing for many years and send out the manuals in
     shrink wrap for users to insert into their own binders. (Don't we have
     a tech writer from IBM on this list? Comments?)

     For the past three years, I have been receiving documentation from
     NOTIS that is in ring binder format. As a user, I really appreciate
     this format for several reasons, some of which are:

         I don't have to dispose of an entire manual full of my notes or
         recopy them into a new manual when update pages are sent instead
         of completely new manuals.

         The pages lie flat on the desk and don't turn by themselves if I
         don't hold them open or put a heavy object on them. It's really
         annoying to have to hunt for information again after the book has
         shut itself.

         A page can be removed and copied if I want to do some writing on
         the page without altering the original text.

         A page can be removed and placed in the holder next to my terminal
         screen for easy reference.

     As for the comments about some users not inserting the update pages,
     perhaps they're the kind of users who don't use hard copy docs anyway.
     I can say that I always kept my manuals completely up-to-date.

     Virginia




______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Author:  Kim Ferri 415-428-2710 <kim -at- ASPECTDV -dot- COM> at SMTP

Thanks to everyone who responded to my request for input on using 3-ring
 binders.  I'm going to use the input to write up a proposal.  I don't think
 it's a good idea to switch to 3-ring binders, but I may need to do a trial
 switch to prove it.  Might be good experience ;->

Thanks again,


Kimberly