RE: Numbering Steps for Multiple Paths

Subject: RE: Numbering Steps for Multiple Paths
From: Aoidìn Scully <ascully -at- flexicom -dot- com>
To: "'David Cramer'" <dacramer -at- videon -dot- wave -dot- ca>, "'Techwr-l'" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 14:38:11 +0100

Oh, dear God! This thread is getting more and more annoying. Whatever
about numbers, bullets, headings, whistles, and bells, if you can't make
it clear from your sentence construction that a step is a step, then
you're in the wrong job.

<snip> If you folks have actually had the
experience of seeing a book with single steps numbered "1" and were
honestly thrown off by it, I would be more impressed by the argument.
But I
_have_ seen two different books without numbered single steps and been
pretty thoroughly thrown, you know, to the extent of having to stop and
hunt for other step-type lists, study them to be sure they were supposed
be the same even though one was numbered and one wasn't, etc.

That's not trivial irritation for me, incidentally. If I have to stop,
hunt, and analyze a document component before I can even continue to use
the document, I consider it a serious flaw, possibly close to

Previous by Author: Thanks and sorta summary
Next by Author: RE: Who dreams up these things?
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