Re: USA Today article demands printed documentation

Subject: Re: USA Today article demands printed documentation
From: Martha J Davidson <editrix -at- SLIP -dot- NET>
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 13:43:47 -0800

>In my previous job, we included a series of APIs that allowed
>programmers to seemlessly work our product into their product. Our goal
>was to do away with the paper documentation and replace it with an
>HTML-based online solution. I watched how our programmers worked and saw
>that they rarely cracked a manual. Instead they used the online help
>that was integrated into their development tools. They said that the
>design of the tool made the online information more useful than paper.

And in that context, I agree that online reference information is often the
best solution. It's what I create at my current job, for exactly that reason.

>So if your goal is to get Aunt Martha up and running on her Windows '95
>computer, a big old bunch of paper documentation probably isn't a bad
>thing. But not everyone is Aunt Martha.

And not everyone who prefers paper documentation is a brand-new naive user.
Some folks still prefer to learn in the linear style of a traditional
user's guide, with all of the conceptual information and examples that are
often missing in online help these days.

And some people really *are* Aunt Martha :)

martha, happy to be the aunt of Adi, Leeav, and Eliott

Martha Jane {Kolman | Davidson}
mailto:editrix -at- slip -dot- net

"If I am not for myself, who will be for me?
If I am only for myself, what am I?
If not now, when?"
--Hillel, "Mishna, Sayings of the Fathers 1:13"

From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=

Previous by Author: Re: FWD: Will it hurt my career to take a lower-level job for a while?
Next by Author: Re: Web development education
Previous by Thread: Re: USA Today article demands printed documentation
Next by Thread: Tech Writer in Corporate Communications Dept.

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

Sponsored Ads