RE: Numbering Steps for Multiple Paths

Subject: RE: Numbering Steps for Multiple Paths
From: David Cramer <dacramer -at- videon -dot- wave -dot- ca>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 10:25:01 -0500

>Just a note. The following is copied from the _Microsoft Manual of Style for
>Technical Publications_:
>
>Single-step procedures
>
>Most designs have a single-step bullet to mark a single-step procedure. Each
>design specifies the type of single-step bullet. Never number a single-step
>procedure as "1."
>
>Jim
>Jims -at- spsi -dot- com


Oh-oh. My apologies. I guess my logic is wrong. My perceptions are wrong.
My experience is wrong. My judgement is wrong. My co-workers, who have
discussed this and reached the same consensus, are wrong (and must be
idiots). Microsoft is God. God has spoken ;-)



-- the difference between Good and Evil: --
-- Evil always hires the crummy engineers. --


David

David Cramer, Process Innovation Evangelist 87-1313 Border Street
PBSC Computer Training Centres (an IBM company) Winnipeg MB R3H 0X4
Corporate Office Research & Development Canada






Previous by Author: RE: Numbering Steps for Multiple Paths
Next by Author: RE: Numbering Steps for Multiple Paths
Previous by Thread: RE: Numbering Steps for Multiple Paths
Next by Thread: RE: Numbering Steps for Multiple Paths


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads