Re: Single-step procedures

Subject: Re: Single-step procedures
From: Kris Olberg <kjolberg -at- IX -dot- NETCOM -dot- COM>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 22:14:46 -0500

----------
> From: Christopher Knight <knight -at- ADA -dot- COM>
> Date: Thursday, July 31, 1997 6:40 PM
>
> Further to the posting earlier about numbers-for-steps and
> bullets-for-lists, my practice is to use a bullet for a procedure
> with only one step. 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. What do you-all think?

Tell the reviewer this:

"A foolish consistency is the hobgobblin of small minds."

I can't remember to whom to attribute this quote.

Regards...Kris
-------------------------
kolberg -at- actamed -dot- com
kris -at- olberg -dot- com

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: Doc-To-Help vs. Robohelp
Next by Author: Re: Single-step procedures
Previous by Thread: Re: Doc-To-Help vs. Robohelp
Next by Thread: Re: Single-step procedures


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads