Procedural info.: best way for two systems?

["Hart, Geoff" <Geoff-H -at- MTL -dot- FERIC -dot- CA>]

Loraine Nazareth wonders: <<What's the best way to present procedural
information where instructions depend on the type of [system or other]
software you are using?>>

The design principle is as follows: If the information differs significantly
(e.g., many or most of the steps differ between the different types of
software), present it in separate sections, each with its own title. Why?
Because presenting the information all intermingled forces readers to decide
at every step whether they have to choose which of the several options
refers to their system; placing the procedures in separate sections for each
system eliminates this cognitive overhead. That is, why make them read the
same information and choose between options for every single step in the
procedure?

Conversely, if the information is largely identical, and only a few steps
differ, it may not make sense to repeat otherwise identical information in
separate sections, even if this approach would be easiest for the reader.
For example, someone who frequently does software installations may find it
more efficient to have all the information in a single section. Because
there are relatively few steps that differ in this situation, these few
differences require little additional work from the reader, so lumping the
two systems together doesn't impose an unacceptable burden. Thus, the design
task becomes one of minimizing the effort required to pick out which of two
or more different options applies. You proposed:

<<1. For a Windows 95 system: On the Optional Components screen,...
2. For a Windows 2000 system: On the Optional Components screen,...>>

... and a few other similar options, but in each option, you'll note that
most of the information is identical; in this specific example, the only
difference is "95" in the first line versus "2000" in the second line.
Moreover, since the step is the same in each case (open the Optional
Components screen), there's no need to use a second number for the Win2000
system, and this may actually be counterproductive. That being the case,
apply a standard information design trick and use the information that's
common to both systems as an introductory header that establishes the
context, then use a table to separate the parts that differ:

1. Open the Components menu and select "Optional components". To select the
optional components:
Windows 95		Windows 2000
a........			a........
b........			b........
c........			c........

The table lets the reader establish context once ("okay, so I'm using
Win2000--I can ignore the lefthand column") and that being done, they can
ignore the context for the remainder of the step (#1) and simply follow the
instructions (a-c) in the righthand column.

--Geoff Hart, FERIC, Pointe-Claire, Quebec
geoff-h -at- mtl -dot- feric -dot- ca
"User's advocate" online monthly at
www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/usersadvocate.html

"How are SF writers like technical writers? Well, we both write about the
things we imagine will happen in the future!"--Sue Gallagher

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

*** Deva(tm) Tools for Dreamweaver and Deva(tm) Search ***
Build Contents, Indexes, and Search for Web Sites and Help Systems
Available now at http://www.devahelp.com or info -at- devahelp -dot- com

Learn about tools and technologies for user assistance developers at
The Help Technology Conference, August 21-24 in Boston, MA
Details and online registration at http://www.SolutionsEvents.com


---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit 
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.