Re: Conventions used in this manual

Subject: Re: Conventions used in this manual
From: hm chou <hchou -at- INTERACCESS -dot- COM>
Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 10:08:29 -0500

i geneerally include a page on conventions in my manuals usually b/c it's
so easy:

1) they're already written, and as long as you don't deviate from the style
guide, then you just plug it in
2) some people do expect it, especially (it seems to me) folks who've
worked on mainframes and actually USE the manuals
3) see list from previous author...

On 10:00 AM 5/29/98 -0400, Lisa Comeau humbly declared...
>It is my humble opinion, based on personal experience, that when *most* =
>users pick up a manual, they don=27t read the =22Conventions used in this =
>manual=22 section.
>However, *I* always read it, for several reasons:
>1> to see what kind of standards other writers are using
>2> to familiarize myself with the style and tone of the book
>3> to see if there is anything I need to know
>4> to ease myself into the manual
>5> to get ideas about my writing from this author
>6> because I=27m anal
>I *always* include this page in my manuals because
>a) I=27m anal
>b) lots of people complain when it isn=27t there
>c) there=27ve *got* to be people like me who read them too
>d) I try to use it to let people know that the symbols used denote =
>different levels of importance, so when they=27re reading the instructions,=
> they know what the *have* to read, and what they can skip.

Fetchez la vache!

Hsuan-min Chou
hchou -at- interaccess -dot- com

Previous by Author: RoboHelp 6.0
Next by Author: Re: Silicon Valley Slump?
Previous by Thread: Re: Conventions used in this manual
Next by Thread: Re: Conventions used in this manual

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

Sponsored Ads