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.
Subject:Re: Fog Index From:Tkritr -at- aol -dot- com To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Fri, 31 May 2002 21:09:22 EDT
I learned about the fog index in grad school. This index has been around for
a while, and while it is far from perfect (as Geoff and others have noted),
it's not entirely without merit. It was presented in my class as one of
several tests to use to assist in determining how well one was presenting
information. What I understood was that the best way to use the fog index was
in conjunction with other tests. (In the interest of not boring everyone, I
won't go into the names and methodologies of those other tests; but I'll dig
through my notes for the information if anyone really cares.)
This is where I'd like to point out that there is a difference between
readability, usability, and comprehensibility. The fog index only touches on
one aspect of this trio. I think it's an interesting test, if nothing else
because the fog index's flaws illustrate that these are three separate
characteristics of a document. It also proves that one test can't cover the
complexity of reading, comprehending, and using documentation. Sometimes what
a test "can't" prove is just as important as what it can prove.
Away from academia, however, reviewing documentation with a combination of
tests (including the fog index) isn't very practical. You'd have to do each
test after each review, and who has time for that?
As others have said, if you stick to the basics and have done a decent
audience analysis, you can leave the testing to the theorists.
Have a great weekend everyone!
Kirsten Petersen
- who appreciates testing, in theory
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Free copy of ARTS PDF Tools when you register for the PDF
Conference by May 15. Leading-Edge Practices for Enterprise
& Government, June 3-5, Bethesda,MD. www.PDFConference.com
Check out RoboDemo for tutorials! It makes creating full-motion software
demonstrations and other onscreen support materials easy and intuitive.
Need RoboHelp? Save $100 on RoboHelp Office in May with our mail-in rebate.
Go to http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l
---
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.
