I’m sure these are reasonably obvious things, but they are also ripe for “everyone assumed someone would do it, so nobody did it”.Īlso, this is not a offer to volunteer. But I also know that nothing screams “abandoned project” like a page full of links to dead or missing sites, or references to out-of-date tools or techniques (e.g., a web design page that has a section devoted to the blink tag). Absolutely sucky job, and one that I’m sure nobody likes. Making sure that all your references are still valid. It’s not so bad with hypertext, since those references can be links, but if it makes sense to present the same information in different ways, do it.ģ: Validity of Data. So it boiled down to at least two-thirds of the printed content was references to somewhere else (which was sometimes another reference). They absolutely refused to print any useful piece of data more than once in a bookshelf-sized set of manuals.
#22936 UNREPLIED MANUALS#
Nothing annoyed me more than dealing with IBM AS/400 manuals back in The Day™. Don’t be afraid of it! But make sure you’re aware of when it happens, so you can change it consistently when needed. Again, not trying to knock Ryan, he’s doing a massive amount of work on his own, and I’m sure it gets overwhelming at times.Ģ: Duplication of Data. I realize that they are in slightly different stages of development, but one is well formatted and laid out, the other is almost stream of consciousness by comparison. As a counter-example, look at the MPCNC and MP3DP project pages. There needs to be a format and guidelines for documentation. I have a few comments on documentation in general, including some commentary on the Herculean job Ryan has been doing so far.ġ: Consistency.
0 kommentar(er)
