Categories vs. Alphabetical

Subject: Categories vs. Alphabetical
From: Ginna Watts <gwatts -at- PIM -dot- BC -dot- CA>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1997 13:29:24 -0800

Hi all,

We're in the middle of upgrading our software from DOS to NT. The software
is essentially a collection of 'modules' (it developed that way due to DOS
memory requirements etc., and just stayed that way...). Some come in the
'core package', some come in extra package collections - there are about 25
in total.
Now in the NT GUI they are being divided into rough categories. That is,
Utilities, Cartographic, Topology etc., even though a customer may have none
of the modules in the category. (They're calling it advertising). The old
manual had docs for just about all modules, and it's arranged
alphabetically. (Note that even though the modules might fall into general
categories, they are not usually used in any particular sequence, and there
are no relationships, even within'categories'. They are nearly completely
separate).

My boss has suggested that we organise the manual along the lines of the GUI
anc separate modules into categories, but I'm in favour of sticking with the
alphabet.

Any suggestions to back me up / refute my arguments?

Ginna
Ginna Watts - Technical Writer
Pacific International Mapping Corp.
gwatts -at- pim -dot- bc -dot- ca

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
to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/ or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html


Previous by Author: Re: Life Priorities
Next by Author: Re: Word Question
Previous by Thread: Re: Technical writers job description
Next by Thread: Re: Categories vs. Alphabetical


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads