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.
"So, is there a better way to do this? Is it enough to have a clear
> and then in the subsequent pages list the names of the Data Elements, so
> the user views "last name" on the screen shot, and views "last name" in
> list of data elements, and that?s enough for him or her to make the
> connection. Or, do users need numeric clues in addition to the verbal
> like in the original document?"
Just having the name and no numbering would work if:
1. The screens never have two fields with the same identical name
2. The labels on the screen are easily understood by a new user
unfamiliar with the screen
3. All of the updateable fields actually HAVE a label!
Sometimes, a screen might have the same name for two different fields and
depend on the user to see that one is at the top of the screen, and one is
in the lower half, being used in a different context. You'll want to number
Sometimes, with old systems with text-based (non-GUI) interfaces, they had
to cram a lot of information into one screen. This meant abbreviated labels
that didn't always make sense until the user was trained by people use to
the screens. Cryptic labels, like "JA" for Joint Account Holder might really
require the numeric link to a more complete description a page back.
Sometimes, I've found that a field exists without a label! (I know, I know),
but space on a 24x80 was at a premium, I guess. Users would be trained to
"Tab, then fill in..."
Numbers formatted differently than the text representing the actual content
DO jump out nicely, so that when I'm flipping back and forth between the
screen shot and the table of field definitions, I would prefer to look for
the number than the text.
I've found numeric clues most helpful; I hope my scenarios made sense!
(I've run into all three of these in the past.)