Summary Part 1- Numbered headings

[Benny Joseph <benny -at- mascon -dot- co -dot- in>]

Hi all...
Some days back I posted a topic about numbered headings. I am very happy to
see that there has been a lively discussion about the matter. I am rather
late at doing this, I know, but all the same I am posting a summary of all
the messages on this topic. Hope this helps.
I am posting this in two sections, as the summary itself is quite long.
Thanks a lot to all for participating in the discussion.
Benny 


David Locke wrote:
1. Numbered headings are used in legal documents and in large document sets
containing similar documents.
2. Numbered headings work best with parallel structured documents that spans
an entire document set. If section 5 covers the same content in every book,
and section .3 is the same aspect, then numbered headings will work. If the
book is a one off, numbered headings might be a convenience, but they are
not going to be useful outside of a small portion of the audience.
3. In most user manuals references are made to headings using page numbers.
There is no assumption of parallelism across a document set. Without
parallelism numbered headings are not worth the effort. You already have
ways to describe the target of your reference.


Ian Sunders wrote:
If you can cross-refer to headings and pages, section numbers are not just
superfluous, they actually make the heading harder to understand and
memorise. The number is clutter containing no useful information.


Geoff Hart wrote:
1. There's an obvious and very important exception to this rule of thumb:
where the numbering scheme is so well-defined and universal for a specific
subject that everyone has long since memorized the numbering scheme and uses
it unconsciously. To them, the numbers are meaningful, and thus, serve as an
efficient tool for indicating context
2. Numbers used to be useful for cross-references in the good ol' days when
you couldn't automatically create cross-references to headings and page
numbers; now that you can do both, I don't see much use to numbered
headings.
3. Moreover, there's a serious usability issue with heading hierarchies so
complex that they require numbering. One place where Miller's work on
short-term memory is likely to apply strongly is in situations where readers
have to keep multiple heading levels in their head simultaneously.


Tina Dean wrote:
1. (Numbered heading) is confusing, and most readers do not use them anyway
except to maybe check what area they are in the chapter. If you use good
headings (task-oriented), then I would recommend dropping the numbers.


Lisa Bronson wrote:

1. (The author and the co-worker) didn't like that there was no formatting
to distinguish between levels.  We believe that it takes to much time for
the reader to drill down in the numbering system to figure out where he/she
is in the manual, and that formatting, being a visual cue, was better.
2. We talked to some of our service and training people and found that they
didn't get any benefit from the numbers, and that they, too, would rather
have visual cues.
3. When we cross reference a heading, we use the text of the heading and
also refer to the page it is on.
4. Suggested a hierarchical heading formatting, with visual clues (Different
fonts, indent etc)


Scott wrote:
1. Referring to a heading is complicated because if it is a physical
printed) document, you need the page number more that the heading numbering.
Once on the page the text description (heading text) is more recognizable
that numbers.
2. Numbering headings down past two level is often counter-productive.
3. The layout must support the information. Numbers by themselves do not
impart a lot of information.

Becca Croft wrote:
1. (Prev. writers were) using numbered headings and chapter-numbered pages
(2-32, 5-14, etc.) so cross-references were impossible to find. I quickly
switched to continuous page numbering and then did away with the numbered
headings, too. They just weren't necessary and removing them made things
easier when compiling the TOC.

Steve Hudson wrote:
If it is to be a printed document, ALWAYS include the page number for the
reference. Experienced readers know how thick 50 pages are, they have NO
idea how thick 2.?.? topics will be.



Virginia Kathleen Eaton wrote:

1. In my experience, too many numbered headings confuse the general reader. 
2. Instead of numbered heading references, use cross-references.
3. Logical order of the material will help cut back on the need for multiple
layers of numbered headings.
4. I would probably number the Heading 1 and then use cross-references, by
page, for the rest of the document.
5. if this were a requirements document or some other type of internal, for
engineer only, reference material, then extensive numbered headings are
beneficial because engineers like to point out specific sentences.
6. In the end, it all depends on what YOUR department likes.



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

A landmark hotel, one of America's most beautiful cities, and 
three and a half days of immersion in the state of the art:
IPCC 01, Oct. 24-27 in Santa Fe.  http://ieeepcs.org/2001/

  +++  Miramo -- Database/XML publishing automation.  See us at  +++
  +++  Seybold SFO, Sept. 25-27, in the Adobe Partners Pavilion  +++
  +++ More info: http://www.axialinfo.com  http://www.miramo.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.