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.
Subject:Re: Procedural Steps II From:Kim Keegan <keegan -at- EXPLORERS -dot- COM> Date:Thu, 31 Oct 1996 13:39:45 -0800
Margaret Packman wrote:
> ---SNIP---
> My question is, how do I indicate that those steps are part of a larger
> procedure. One of the suggestions I've had (thanks, Bonni) was to write it
> this way:
> Step One: Install the Framis
> First you need to install the Framis:
> Step 1. Type thing 1. Something happens.
> Step 2. Type thing 2. Something else happens here
> Step 3. Type thing 3. Still another thing happens here.
> Step Two: Install the Dohicky
> After you have installed the Framis, install the Dohicky:
> Step 1. Type thing 4. Something happens
> Step 2. Etc.
> ---SNIP---
My first reaction at the example was to modify your numbering scheme:
First you need to install the Framis.
Step 1: Install the Framis
1.1 Type thing 1. Something happens.
1.2 Type thing 2. Something else happens here.
1.3 Type thing 3. Still anothe thing happens here.
After you have installed the Framis, install the Dohicky.
I didn't like "Step One" with "Step 1" as a sub-step. If you don't like the 1.1, 1.2,
1.3 format, what about a,b,c or 1a, 1b, 1c or some other variation?
