Re[2]: Re. Documentation for various security levels

Subject: Re[2]: Re. Documentation for various security levels
From: FB -at- POINTDUBLIN -dot- CCMAIL -dot- COMPUSERVE -dot- COM
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 05:42:38 EST

Karen,
I agree with you about separating the material for different users
into different books. As you point out, you don't want to put off
users from opening the books by having those books full of
information that they don't want. I would find it frustrating as a
user to be confronted with details about menus and functionality
that I could never access. Also, there may be plenty of information
about the system that you don't want them to know.

Using, maintaining and customising the software we produce where I
work requires three levels (at least) of ability in our users : end
user; system administrator; and programmer. We separate the
descriptions of the different functionality because each of these
groups has different access rights. This also solves a more
practical problem: one site may have 80 end users, but only one
administrator and only one or two programmers. Having separated the
material cuts down on the cost of supplying the documentation:
rather than supplying 80 fat books, we supply 80 USer's Guides and
Quick Reference cards; one Sys Admin Guide; and two Programmer's
References.

Fionnuala Broughan
fb -at- pointdublin -dot- ccmail -dot- compuserve -dot- com

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Re. Documentation for various security levels
Author: INTERNET:Karen_Mayer -dot- TOUCH_TECHNOLOGY -at- notes -dot- compuserve -dot- com at CSERVE
Date: 13y02y96 13:02


<snip>

All this data is kept in a single database and accessed with a single
piece of software. What I suggest is putting the clerk's instructions in
one book, the administrator's instructions in another book, and the data
center's instructions in a third. What you suggest is lumping them all in
one manual.

<snip>

It's hard enough getting users to read the manuals. If we put in a whole
lot of information that isn't applicable to what the user is doing, he
has a harder time finding what he needs. Documents that are
system-oriented won't readily tell a user how to order plane tickets for
Joe Doe in Brussels. The user would have to hunt for that information
amongst a bunch of stuff he doesn't -- and will never -- need.

Comments?

-- karen


Previous by Author: Re[2]: Is grammar fair game? (deep thoughts)
Next by Author: Re: PHIL: Tech Writing Dichotomy
Previous by Thread: Re. Documentation for various security levels
Next by Thread: Re: Re. Documentation for various security levels


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads