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: Single-step procedures From:Pat Gantt <pagantt -at- POSTOFFICE -dot- WORLDNET -dot- ATT -dot- NET> Date:Fri, 1 Aug 1997 11:27:16 -0500
> > A reviewer has just asked me to change this to a number 1 "for
> > consistency". I figure a number 1 implies more than one step.
> Your reviewer has a strange sense of consistency, and I am in agreement
> with you.
Ditto. There is consistency and there is what pulls the
eye away from the item and to the numbering and bullet.
Thus, losing the real message to the reader.
IMHO the 1 number would look quite odd.
Is there a compromise here? Another way to make
the direction/statement? Without either?
Depending on the reviewer's sway you may have to go for
the consistency... reality does intrude <voice trailing>
Pat Gantt, M.S. HRD
Personal email ~ pagantt -at- worldnet -dot- att -dot- net
The University of Tennessee Alum
Technical and Vocational Studies Guide
~ The Mining Company ~
Biz Mail ~ votech -dot- guide -at- miningco -dot- com http://votech.miningco.com
[humor = (intelligence + personality)]
GO VOLS! Don't ask Peyton who!