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: Too short for a TOC From:Kris Olberg <kjolberg -at- IX -dot- NETCOM -dot- COM> Date:Mon, 9 Jun 1997 18:28:02 -0500
At first glance, creating a TOC for something so small seems silly. But
readers use TOCs for reasons other than associating page numbers with
topics. They also use them as summaries, allowing them to determine, at a
glance, whether the document contains the answers they need.
A document's "retrievability" should be a primary concern for any author.
Regardless of the size of the document (except for very small docs of one
or two pages), the document should have appropriate retrievability aids.
The audience is not necessarily the reader. Meeting your audience's needs
is your highest priority; however, meeting your readers' needs is also a
priority, even if you do nothing more than help them quickly determine that
the document does not contain what they need.
Regards...Kris
-------------------------
kolberg -at- actamed -dot- com
kris -at- olberg -dot- com
----------
> From: Matthew J Long <mjl100z -at- MAIL -dot- ODU -dot- EDU>
> To: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
> Subject: Too short for a TOC
> Date: Monday, June 09, 1997 2:05 PM
>
> All,
>
> How short is too short for a table of contents? I am prducing 10-20 page
> technical manuals (that are actually more like overviews of database
> systems) that are easily navigable by thumbing through. I don't want to
> include a TOC because it seems like overkill and frankly silly. Do you
> agree that a TOC should be reserved for longer manuals or do you think
> that I am just being lazy? Please qualifiy your opinion!! Thanks.
>
> ////////////////////////////*****************************
>
> Matthew J. Long
> mjl100z -at- mail -dot- odu -dot- edu
> matt -dot- long -at- justice -dot- usdoj -dot- gov
>
> *************************************************////////////
>
> TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
> to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
> to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
> Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/ or search and
> browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html
TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/ or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html
