RE: Documenting enabled/disabled items

Subject: RE: Documenting enabled/disabled items
From: "Halter, Meg" <HalterMC -at- navair -dot- navy -dot- mil>
To: "'Christina Tolliver'" <christina_tolliver -at- hotmail -dot- com>, TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 13:59:19 -0800

Hi Christina --

From the beginning of your message, it seems that this information is NOT
obvious, given the absence of consistent cues. The second option seems
better because it specifically states what's editable and what isn't.

But an even better solution would be for the developers to link the
background colors (or some other cue) with the property of being editable or
read only. Seems to me that this sort of information should be obvious from
inspection of the dialog box, without resorting to documentation. Of course,
it's much easier to say it should be changed than to change it!

Just a thought on a Monday.

-- Meg

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christina Tolliver [SMTP:christina_tolliver -at- hotmail -dot- com]
>
[ snip ]
> fields with a white
> background are not always editable, and fields with a gray background are
> not always read-only. The current user documentation indicates when fields
>
> become disabled or enabled. Here's an example.
>
> 2 Click the Add button.
> The non-editable fields are disabled.
> The editable fields are enabled.
[ snip ]
> Would this example be more helpful if the specific field
> names were listed? Then, the example might read this way.
>
> 2 Click the Add button.
> The Host, Switch, and Equipment boxes are disabled.
> The Calling Feature box is enabled.




Previous by Author: OT: Bugs and changes record keeping
Next by Author: RE: "Two-track" documentation
Previous by Thread: RE: Documenting enabled/disabled items
Next by Thread: Re: Documenting enabled/disabled items


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads