TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Procedural Steps From:Rebecca Phillips <Rebecca -at- QRONUS -dot- CO -dot- IL> Date:Wed, 30 Oct 1996 16:39:08 +0200
My personal observations.
I can't stand those numbered non-steps either. On the other hand, when
you are displaying the picture that pops up, you might feel that part of
the text is dangling after the picture. (Although that probably
indicates some other style problem.)
>You mentioned that "some commercial software manuals <snip> often do not
or regularly number the steps." Well, if they aren't internally
consistent, I wouldn't be too concerned about their being an authority
on how to properly format a manual. This actually relates to the
argument on how to rate typos. While inconsistent numbering might irk
editors, people are still buying these books because (I assume) the
writing is lucid and explanations are complete.
I think numbered steps are great! There's nothing I hate more than
sticking my left index finger in the book and doing something else with
my right hand. Also, numbered steps stand out graphically in the book. A
lot of readers don't want to read a paragraph explaining them what the
function does; they already decided they want to do it and are looking
for the steps. When they see that number 1, it signals, "Start here if
you already know you want to do this."
Rebecca M. Phillips
Qronus Interactive Ltd.
Automated System Testing http://www.qronus-int.com
rebecca -at- qronus -dot- co -dot- il
Please ignore weird attachment: it's an e-mail bug