Re: "one action per step" in instructions

[Nancy Hayes <nancyh -at- PMAFIRE -dot- INEL -dot- GOV>]

In article <009915E5 -dot- 85AAFCC0 -dot- 11 -at- CVAX -dot- IPFW -dot- INDIANA -dot- EDU>,
 <holland -at- cvax -dot- ipfw -dot- indiana -dot- edu> wrote:
>Nancy Hayes proposes as a universal standard putting "one action per step" in
>instructions.  Yes, but like most universal rules, there are exceptions and
>complications:

No kidding.  Obviously, I forgot to add "unless the steps are so closely
related they may as well be one action" to the end of that comment.


>o Some steps must contain concurrent actions: "While holding down the <CTRL>
>  key, press Z."

Still one main action <g>; the first part is a condition.

>o Sometimes defining what constitutes "one action" can be difficult: Do I write
>  "6.  Type your username.
>  "7.  Press <ENTER>."

>  or do I write
>  "6.  Type your username and press <ENTER>."    ?

This one.  Or possible "Enter username" if your user is used to computer
jargon.

[snip]


>o Sometimes a series of actions is so simple that putting each action into a
>  separate step would condescend toward the reader, so lumping them together
>  becomes wise: "9.  Turn the computer, monitor, and printer OFF."

Or "Monitor sightglass for increase in level and throttle valve ------"

>Perhaps the only universal rule is that there are no universal rules. . . .

Sure there are, Steve.  They just change per company, univeristy, or e-text
style guide.

Wasn't this the thread on trying to get a "standard" list of things to
teach in college tech writing classes?  Did we ever come up w/ a list,
or is everyone running into the same problem Elaine (?), Steve, and I
are:  there really isn't one right answer?

Back to editing requirements documents (yippie!)

Nancy (nancyh -at- pmafire -dot- inel -dot- gov)