[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

# RE: Docs Organization

- To: "Support Team (E-mail)" <support@gesn.com>
- Subject: RE: Docs Organization
- From: "Ken Clark" <ken@gesn.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 09:39:59 -0600
- Importance: Normal
- In-reply-to: <002901be548e$8c0cc950$37e7afce@danno.GESDOMAIN>

    > From: owner-support@gesn.com [mailto:owner-support@gesn.com]On Behalf Of
    >
    > However, I also don't think that you will be able to get away from
    > describing commands, fields, views, menus and buttons because
    > eventually it
    > will used for GEMS online help screens.
    >
    > So in my humble opinion, you may have to follow both methodologies.

    Hmmm, good point.  I would go one further and say that the fields, menus,
    etc should (or at least could) strictly be used for online help.

    I don't like tying field names etc to written docs for what it is worth.  My
    opinion is that if the purpose of a field is not "obvious" then either (1)
    the interface sucks, (2) the process/purpose of the dialog was not explained
    very well, and (3) (last) there should have been a help button.  Also, the
    software interface should be allowed to change for the better in the "sucks"
    case without having to (completely) rewrite tons of docs.

    Again I underline that if the electoral process (as we interpret it) is
    explained, then how to use GEMS should be obvious.  If it is not, then GEMS
    probably needs work, not the docs.

    Ken

- Follow-Ups:
  - Re: Docs Organization
    - From: "Ian S. Piper" <ian@gesn.com>

- References:
  - Re:
    - From: "robert" <robglobal@sprynet.com>

- Prev by Date: Re:
- Next by Date: Re: Docs Organization
- Index(es):
  - Chronological
  - Thread