FW: comments?: Procedural Steps

[Misti Tucker <mdelaney -at- SOFTWARE-SERVICES -dot- COM>]

>I'm taking this approach in the training manual I'm writing - it seems to
>work
>well for relatively simple procedures - it breaks down for more complex ones,
>however - the graphics get too hard to read.

>-becca
>----------

>>From:         Melinda M. Carr[SMTP:melindac -at- CAPSOFT -dot- COM]
>>Sent:         Thursday, October 31, 1996 12:47 PM
>>To:   TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
>>Subject:      Re: Procedural Steps
>>
>>We tried something new in our manual that is about to ship that might
>>come back to haunt us.
>>
>>The main step-by-step procedure in each topic begins with bolded text
>>saying "To blah blah blah" and then lists in a paragraph the step or
>>steps needed to get to the first major dialog box. (Usually something
>>like, "Select blah blah and click blah.") Then we display the dialog box
>>and have the rest of the steps as callouts to the graphic. (My boss does
>>put more text in the paragraph than I. I'd like to convice him to
>>change.)
>>
>>Less common steps that are related to the main step-by-step are listed as
>>hints at the bottom of the page.
>>
>>I was a little uncomfortable about abandoning the numbered steps, but I
>>think the new format is easier to read and understand because it
>>integrates the text and the graphics more tightly. It also makes the book
>>easier to browse because topics take up fewer pages, so related topics
>>are closer together.
>>
>>Have any of you done something similar? We think our users will like it
>>(we had some positive feedback from internal and external beta testers),
>>but I have to admit that this discussion has made me a little nervous
>>about the wisdom of making the change.
>>
>>Melinda (melindac -at- capsoft -dot- com)
>>
>>