Re: Procedural Steps II

Subject: Re: Procedural Steps II
From: Kim Keegan <keegan -at- EXPLORERS -dot- COM>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 13:39:45 -0800

Margaret Packman wrote:
> ---SNIP---
> My question is, how do I indicate that those steps are part of a larger
> procedure. One of the suggestions I've had (thanks, Bonni) was to write it
> this way:

> Step One: Install the Framis
> First you need to install the Framis:
> Step 1. Type thing 1. Something happens.
> Step 2. Type thing 2. Something else happens here
> Step 3. Type thing 3. Still another thing happens here.

> Step Two: Install the Dohicky
> After you have installed the Framis, install the Dohicky:
> Step 1. Type thing 4. Something happens
> Step 2. Etc.
> ---SNIP---

My first reaction at the example was to modify your numbering scheme:

First you need to install the Framis.

Step 1: Install the Framis
1.1 Type thing 1. Something happens.
1.2 Type thing 2. Something else happens here.
1.3 Type thing 3. Still anothe thing happens here.

After you have installed the Framis, install the Dohicky.

Step 2: Install the Dohicky
2.1 blah blah blah.
2.2 bl-blah blah blah

I didn't like "Step One" with "Step 1" as a sub-step. If you don't like the 1.1, 1.2,
1.3 format, what about a,b,c or 1a, 1b, 1c or some other variation?

Good luck.
--
Kim Keegan | keegan -at- explorers -dot- com
http://www2.explorers.com/~keegan/
Is it 5:00 yet?


Previous by Author: Re: Procedural Steps
Next by Author: Re: Following
Previous by Thread: Re: Procedural Steps II
Next by Thread: Reality and the SME


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads