Re: Footnotes - acceptable in technical documentation?

Subject: Re: Footnotes - acceptable in technical documentation?
From: Scott Bulloch <scott -dot- bulloch -at- gmail -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2013 09:41:11 -0800

At my company, we don't use footnotes in regular instructional text. Our
practice for stuff like that is to indent a note icon (like a light bulb
for tips or a yield sign for cautions) and a paragraph or so of text.

As far as tables go, I have seen table footnotes, but lately, the practice
has been more toward putting such information in a Comments cell in the row.


On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Robert Lauriston <robert -at- lauriston -dot- com>wrote:

> Looking at the MS Manual of Style 4, there are a few references to
> table footnotes, no mention of regular footnotes.
>
> There's also one reference that seems to presume the writer is using
> Word to edit WinHelp source: "Also, cross-references (See and See
> also) are limited to normal keywords that jump directly to the topic
> that contains the K (keyword) footnote with that keyword."
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> New! Doc-to-Help 2013 features the industry's first HTML5 editor for
> authoring.
>
> Learn more: http://bit.ly/ZeOZeQ
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as scott -dot- bulloch -at- gmail -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
>


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
New! Doc-to-Help 2013 features the industry's first HTML5 editor for authoring.

Learn more: http://bit.ly/ZeOZeQ

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

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


Follow-Ups:

References:
Footnotes - acceptable in technical documentation?: From: Bruce Megan (ST-CO/MKP3)
Re: Footnotes - acceptable in technical documentation?: From: Robert Lauriston
RE: Footnotes - acceptable in technical documentation?: From: Brian.Henderson
Re: Footnotes - acceptable in technical documentation?: From: Robert Lauriston

Previous by Author: SGML - 38784 DTDs and FOSIs for Arbortext
Next by Author: RE: Best places to put topics when they're needed twice
Previous by Thread: Re: Footnotes - acceptable in technical documentation?
Next by Thread: Re: Footnotes - acceptable in technical documentation?


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads