Re: Best Documentation

Subject: Re: Best Documentation
From: "Anthony Markatos" <tonymar -at- hotmail -dot- com>
To: gdowler -at- questercorp -dot- com, techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 16:07:08 PST


Ginna Dowler said:

..We make electronic equipment for trains, and in one situation (before I started, of course), our maintenance instructions were poorly written and almost incomprehensible, even to us. The writer had poor grammar skills, used a number of different terms for the same thing, and was genenerally sloppy. The task analysis was fine, the drawings were fine. It was the actual text which was awful......

Tony Markatos responds:

Experience has made me a firm believer in the old saying: "Never sweat the details." Therefore, it is very difficult for me to envision a situation where analysis and planning were properly done, but the writer just totally botched the project with poor grammar.

Lets say that someone hires a world-renowned designer to build his/her dream home. Would that person then botch the whole effort up by using cans of spray paint to paint the walls? Possible, but not likely.

P.S. Standardization of terminology is part of analysis. In fact, it is impossible to perform an effective task analysis without addressing standardization in a big way!

Tony Markatos
(tonymar -at- hotmail -dot- com)

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com





Previous by Author: RE: Best Documentation
Next by Author: Re: Re[4]: Best Documentation
Previous by Thread: RE: Best Documentation
Next by Thread: RE: Re[2]: Best Documentation


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads