[in]consistency of fonts

Subject: [in]consistency of fonts
From: "McLauchlan, Kevin" <Kevin -dot- McLauchlan -at- safenet-inc -dot- com>
To: "techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 15:37:49 -0500

I'm producing WebHelp, where a large component of the documented system is operated by command-line.

I have "standard" fonts and colors that I use throughout the Help in loose compliance with our corporate branding.
I say "loose" because, as you know, browsers (and their users) are free to substitute fonts with alacrity and abandon.

Naturally, I have a standard format (color, size, font, and underline) for hyperlink text.

Mostly, that works, and nobody complains.

However, many command-line interface commands have sub-commands and options that get their own pages.

So, an intro page for a major command will have just a list with the subcommands under headings,
mimicking the look of the command-line summary syntax, like:

widget - manage widgets in the system
The following sub-commands are available:

Name (short) Description
===== ====== ===========
add a Add a new widget
delete de Delete a named widget
clear c Delete all widgets
enable e Enable a widget by name
disable di Disable a widget by name
show s Show info about a named widget
list l List all widgets

Naturally, it would be nice if each sub-command's Name were to be a link to the page that describes that command.

How important would it be to you (and why):

- that the link words keep the same appearance as links anywhere in the WebHelp, so it's obvious they are links

- that the link words be modified to blend in with the CLI look-and-feel, and users will just know that they are links?

FWIW, I'm in the former camp.
Some of my documentation reviewers are in the same camp.
Others of my documentation reviewers are in the latter camp.
None of the people with strong opinions are my boss/person who signs my evaluations...


The information contained in this electronic mail transmission
may be privileged and confidential, and therefore, protected
from disclosure. If you have received this communication in
error, please notify us immediately by replying to this
message and deleting it from your computer without copying
or disclosing it.


You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources and info.

Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online magazine at http://techwhirl.com

Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives


Previous by Author: RE: Question for writers in New Zealand and Australia
Next by Author: RE: [in]consistency of fonts
Previous by Thread: Re: Frame 10 header numbering problem
Next by Thread: RE: [in]consistency of fonts

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

Sponsored Ads