Re: Documenting a "wizard"

Subject: Re: Documenting a "wizard"
From: Keith Hood <bus -dot- write -at- gmail -dot- com>
To: Hannah Drake <hannah -at- formulatrix -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 17:49:06 -0500

It's a judgement call. Here are some things that I think need to go into
making that judgment.

It has been my experience that it's a bad idea to be optimistic in
estimating how easily users will understand screen features. Murphy's Law
has never been repealed.

What's this "we" stuff? Were you part of the team that designed the
wizard? Can you personally vouch for it always working correctly? Has it
been subjected to intensive operational testing? In short, can you prove
that anyone - and I mean ANYONE - can use it correctly without
documentation?

What happens if the wizard has features that are color-dependent, where a
color-blind user may have a problem?



On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Hannah Drake <hannah -at- formulatrix -dot- com> wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> We are releasing a new wizard that walks a user through a process. The
> other person thinks the wizard should be documented for the users. My
> argument is it's redundant, because the wizard explains exactly what it is
> IN the wizard itself (I know because I wrote the text and helped design the
> wizard). I also pointed out that if we have to document the wizard, we
> failed at creating a useful wizard.
>
> The only place we currently mention the wizard in documentation is in a
> topic that talks about the various ribbon menus and what you can do on each
> ribbon, when we say: this button launches the such-and-such wizard.
>
> Thoughts? Am I wrong here?
>
> -Hannah
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Doc-To-Help 2014 v1 now available. SharePoint 2013 support, NetHelp
> enhancements, and more. Read all about it.
>
> Learn more: http://bit.ly/NNcWqS
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as bus -dot- write -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
>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Doc-To-Help 2014 v1 now available. SharePoint 2013 support, NetHelp enhancements, and more. Read all about it.

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

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

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:
Documenting a "wizard": From: Hannah Drake

Previous by Author: Re: Grammar help "a RMA" or "an RMA"?
Next by Author: Re: "Structured writing = commodified writing"
Previous by Thread: Re: Documenting a "wizard"
Next by Thread: Re: Documenting a "wizard"


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads