Computers aren't hammers (more on passives)

[Arthur Comings <atc -at- CORTE-MADERA -dot- GEOQUEST -dot- SLB -dot- COM>]

I don't think this hammer analogy stands up. A computer program is our
tool, but a bit more complicated than a hammer.

Compare:

"When you feed a board into a table saw, the saw divides the board into
two segemnts."

I didn't divide it. Me *seeing* it wasn't the important event -- matter
of fact, it would have happened whether I saw it or not. With a
computer, if it was some complex process, I might not even stick around
to *see* whatever milestone the writer needs to mention. When the
program is done, it displays the Blotz window.

Speaking of paying attention, would you say, "If you let your hand
follow the board into the saw, you will see it start to bleed?" or " .
. . you will make it bleed?"

Nope -- it's a complex tool, and the most intuitive way to speak about it
is to recognize what the tool does, under our guidance. The saw will
cut the object.




Arthur Comings

GeoQuest
Corte Madera, California
atc -at- corte-madera -dot- geoquest -dot- slb -dot- com


/ The user is the agent.  Compare  "the hammer hit the nail".

> I prefer to put the user at the centre; after all, the manual is being written
> for her/him:

> "Choose [the option] to see the Program Manager window" or
> "When you choose [this option], you see the Program Manager window"

> Richard

> --
> Richard Burnham, Wise Words               ww -at- wiseword -dot- demon -dot- co -dot- uk
>          Technical writing, training, learning materials
>          4 Roundway, Shrewsbury, Shropshire SY3 7TG, UK
> Tel/Fax 0743 272354  Int'l +44 743 272 354  CompuServe 100327,2011