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.
Re: Effective Arguments for Unique Control Names...?
Subject:Re: Effective Arguments for Unique Control Names...? From:"Anameier, Christine A - Eagan, MN" <christine -dot- a -dot- anameier -at- usps -dot- gov> To:<techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Wed, 6 Aug 2003 16:38:56 -0500
> Because of the layout, the team believes users won't
> have a problem figuring out which of the identically-named
> controls to select.
>
> But from a user documentation perspective,
> identically-named controls can present a problem.
> . . . I asked the user interface design team to append a
> number to the existing control names to differentiate them.
Hmmmm.... if the controls are named the same thing, that's a
documentation problem, i.e., your problem.
On the other hand, if the controls are arbitrarily labeled "Whizbo 1"
and "Whizbo 2" to make your job easier, that leaves the users to wonder
what the numbers mean. Then it's THEIR problem. (Honestly, I can see why
the interface designers weren't enthusiastic about that idea.)
You're outnumbered. Even even a tenth of the users are confused by the
numbered labels you suggested, that's a bigger problem than one unhappy
writer.
This sounds like a good place for a screen capture. That way, you can
show exactly what you mean. Or, failing that, you can give a little
context in the procedure: "Click the Whizbo button to the right of the
Foo box."