Again, that is a design progroblem, not a documentation problem. Good GUI 
design never, ever results in an interface that doesn't make sense. If it did, 
it wouldn't be good GUI design. On the typical large-scale project, GUI 
designers serve the dual function of designers and usability experts; if they 
crank out spiffy GUIs that fail, they won't be working very long. Business 
competition has a tendency to validate 
Darwin. in the Design, Development, and 
Production of:Technical Documentation - Online Content - Enterprise Websites> 
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 15:48:05 -0700> From: athloi at> Subject: RE: 
radical revamping of techpubs> To: tekwrytr at; framers at> > A product can have good design, and good programming, 
and still be> inadequate for users.> > How can that be, you ask?> > Technically 
speaking, it may be doing what its creators think it> should, and it may be 
well-created. It may be disorganized, and it may> not address the user's needs, 
and that's where TWs come in.> > We are the only group who sees the 
application, from start to finish,> from a user perspective. Therefore we are 
able to offer sanity checks:> > - This interface doesn't make sense.> - 
Although the app is well-designed, in this context it becomes slow or> crashes, 
and in our view, users will come this way often.> - The task we're designing 
this for is too narrow/too broad.> > --- Technical Writer <tekwrytr at> wrote:> > > Exactly. And that is in the province of the developer, 
the> > programmers, and the GUI designers. Using TW to cover up poor design> > 
and inadequate programming is not particularly useful for> > anyone.> >> technical writing | consulting | 
development> > __________________________________________________> Do You 
Yahoo!?> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > 
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf?. Stop by 

Reply via email to