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[4]: Should we skip HTML? From:"Walker, Arlen P" <Arlen -dot- P -dot- Walker -at- JCI -dot- COM> Date:Wed, 11 Mar 1998 10:39:25 -0600
I combined two sets of comments in this reply. Both seem to make a
similar point. It's also a point with which I agree; that is, that
by limiting the browser functionality, the product 'hems in' the
audience. However, this assumes that all products being documented
are low-end, universal-use programs (such as a word processor or
spreadsheet).
No (or at least *I* didn't). I'm assuming that some audiences can have a
tight circle drawn around them and some can't. And that fact will impact
your choice of delivery mechanism. I said your example depended upon your
specific audience; it wasn't capable of being extended to a generality.
The only thing I questioned was depending so heavily upon IE4. It puts a
demand upon your users that they use it, either instead of or in addition
to their current browser of choice. Since I'm not familiar with either your
product or your user base, it might or might not be an unreasonable demand;
I didn't mean to imply it absolutely was unreasonable. It wasn't a
criticism as much as it was something offered for your consideration.
You use whatever tools best fit the inside of your user's corral. Some
folks have smaller corrals than others. That's perfectly fine. But we
should always remember that the tools that cover one corral well may be
woefully inadequate for others' corrals.
To return to your example, your approach may fit your user base quite well.
But applying that approach to Interleaf (or substitute FrameMaker if you
like, I'm trying to pick programs which have a similarly sized user base)
wouldn't be such a good fit, would it?
Have fun,
Arlen
Chief Managing Director In Charge, Department of Redundancy Department
DNRC 224
Arlen -dot- P -dot- Walker -at- JCI -dot- Com
----------------------------------------------
In God we trust; all others must provide data.
----------------------------------------------
Opinions expressed are mine and mine alone.
If JCI had an opinion on this, they'd hire someone else to deliver it.
