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: Numbering From:Beverly Parks <bparks -at- HUACHUCA-EMH1 -dot- ARMY -dot- MIL> Date:Wed, 25 Oct 1995 08:28:35 MST
John Posada <jposada -at- NOTES -dot- CC -dot- BELLCORE -dot- COM> asked about
numbering-->
We write technical proposals for the communications industry
in response to bid and proposal solicitations ansd some of
them are quite technical. For the most part, we use
government numbering:
1.0, 2.0, 2.1, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.2, etc.
Now, the question.
Would I have been able to put a 2.1 if I hadn't used a 2.2?
If not, how do I do a 2.1.1 and a 2.1.2 if I hadn't used a 2.2
=============
Could the content of 2.1 be incorporated into 2.0, and what
would have been 2.1.1, 2.1.2, etc could become 2.1, 2.2, etc.
A general rule as I understand it is that if there is only a
single subparagraph, that information can probably be included
in the higher level paragraph immediately above it.
Just a thought.
___________________________________________________________
"The Web is the most exciting thing happening in computers
today... . Also, it's very exciting because Microsoft
doesn't own it." -- Steve Jobs, founder of Apple Computer
=*= Beverly Parks -- bparks -at- huachuca-emh1 -dot- army -dot- mil =*=
=*= "Unless otherwise stated, all comments are my own. =*=
=*= I am not representing my employer in any way." =*=
