Re: Ideas in Motion

Subject: Re: Ideas in Motion
From: "Stephen Arrants" <stephena -at- compbear -dot- com>
To: "Anthony Markatos" <tonymar -at- hotmail -dot- com>, "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 17:47:44 -0800

----- Original Message -----
From: "Anthony Markatos" <tonymar -at- hotmail -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2000 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: Ideas in Motion

| Tony Markatos responds to Katie Kearns:
| Your class's experience is just further prof that written text is a
| very poor vehicle to use for documenting procedural information. To quote
| Ed Yourdon "Procedure is like dance - it defies written description."
| Ed means is that procedure is asychronous - multiple things happening at
| same time and multi-decision branching. Text is very poor at describing
| such.

And yet people have been using text-only procedures quite successfully for
years and years.
It isn't that the text is poor in some situations, it may be that the writer
isn't in the same mind-set as the user.
Flow-chart graphics may only further confuse and frustrate the user. You
not only need to know
WHAT the procedure will do, but WHY the user would need to do it.

steve arrants

Previous by Author: Re: Ideas in Motion
Next by Author: XHTML
Previous by Thread: Re: Ideas in Motion
Next by Thread: RE: Ideas in Motion

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

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads