Re: SC Chapter of STC Sponsors Minimalism Seminar

Subject: Re: SC Chapter of STC Sponsors Minimalism Seminar
From: Barb Philbrick <burkbrick -at- AOL -dot- COM>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 14:35:22 GMT

In article <199701081751 -dot- MAA05266 -at- closer -dot- scescape -dot- net>, "George F. Hayhoe"
<gfhayhoe -at- scescape -dot- net> writes:

>And it is as applicable to online
>documentation as to paper manuals, as its recent adoption by Microsoft in
>the Help for its products indicates.

If that isn't a strike against it! I've found Microsoft's latest help
files to be quite frustrating. It sends me into help wizards that I don't
need and that take a lot of time to get into and out of. It doesn't
provide in-depth discussions of more complex problems and too much
information on the easy stuff. The hard copy manuals are useless pieces of
marketing fluff.

Is it because of poor research and bad assumptions on Microsoft's part, or
is it a problem endemic to minimalist documentation?

I like the concept of minimalist documentation, but if Microsoft's
documentation is considered a good implementation, I want none of it!


I guess it's too late, but I don't mean to start a flame session on
Microsoft. I am in

TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
Search the archives at or search and
browse the archives at

Previous by Author: Re: Cost for a CD?
Next by Author: Re: Knowing prog. lang. +s to a TW's $?
Previous by Thread: Re: SC Chapter of STC Sponsors Minimalism Seminar
Next by Thread: ADMIN: Administrivia

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

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads