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.
I don't think readers are very concerned about the possible implicit
meanings lurking behind a figure-numbering system. The purpose of figure
numbers (when they are used, and they aren't, always....) is to provide
a quick way of referencing a figure, so that neither author nor reader
has to describe it in detail in order to refer to it. Therefore you
would never want to repeat the figure number, even when you have exactly
repeated the figure.
If you want the reader to look at Figure C, which is on page 32,
then refer to Figure C, but if you want the reader to refer to the same
figure on page 98, then refer to Figure G, if that's what it is called.
I assume that the figure is repeated because it serves some function in
both cases. So the reader shouldn't be too confused when looking at the
figure for the second time if the figure is obviously illustrating
something in the text in its immediate vicinity. In fact, I seriously
doubt whether the reader will notice that he is looking at the figure
for the second time, or care if he does notice, provided that the figure
is serving a purpose in that location.
