Hi Simon,
Just a warning upfront: This could end up in a long discussion as each writer
has his/her own preferences, and should have - to maintain this profession as
an art instead of just another job. ;-)
I think I get your drift, but for me the temptation as a user to "just pressed
as it says here I should do so..." stays: It is not just in the used
punctuation and line separation but moreover in the emphasis combined with the
wording: Your separation in different lines would make no difference to me as
the sentence structure has not changed a bit; I would still act the same I
suppose...
It may be enough for others, but I think rephrasing and "weight balancing" is
also necessary here. What I think I should see are an "acknowledge this" step,
and a subsequent "act now" step. If the first step is likely to be skipped you
need to make sure the weight shifts to the first line and you have a virtual
"full stop and now think" remark standing out between these two lines.
The emphasis that your button graphics automatically get (due to the abnormal
"typeface" of graphics in text), acts as honey to bees and should be balanced
(maybe even over balanced - can't hurt!) by the just as important line right
above which tells you to WAIT for these indicators...
I would therefore rephrase as follows:
(note that both [X] and {FOO}/{BAR} are eye-catching graphics)
1. **Make sure** system indicators {FOO} and {BAR} are shown.
2. After confirming step 1 enter [X][X][X]
The numbering emphasizes that this instruction actually exists of two steps; a
first warning not just to enter [X][X][X]. I then emphasized **make sure** to
increase the weight of the first step to make it stand out better and draw more
attention than the subsequent step: In my opinion this too helps draw the
readers' eye to the top line, despite the tempting buttons in the second line
(which you may also choose to reformat and stand-out less). Finally I embedded
a silent warning in the second step: "After confirming step 1...", a third
indicator that there's more to do than just enter [X][X][X]!
Vriendelijke groet / Kind regards,
?
Dick Spierings
?
? +31 (0)413 343786
?? www.fluidwell.com
w d.spierings at fluidwell.com
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Simon BUCH [mailto:simon.buch at m-ais.com]
Verzonden: dinsdag 18 mei 2010 12:41
Aan: framers at lists.frameusers.com
CC: Rick Quatro; Dick Spierings
Onderwerp: RE: reversed text style
Hello Framers & Dick,
My reason for keeping instructions simple is to avoid situations like:
When the system indicators {FOO} and {BAR} are shown, enter [X][X][X].
... as I have seen users follow instructions and pressing the keys: X and X and
X and .
I prefer to separate input and output onto separate lines, for example:
When the system indicators:
{FOO} {BAR}
... are shown, enter:
[X][X][X]
Punctuation can often mess up instructions, and so I avoid them.
It's just a personal style thing, but for me, keep instructions simple.
Regards
// Simon
-----Original Message-----
From: Dick Spierings [mailto:d.spieri...@fluidwell.com]
Sent: 18 May 2010 11:25
To: Simon BUCH; framers at lists.frameusers.com
Cc: Rick Quatro
Subject: RE: reversed text style
Simon,
I totally agree and I already decided to go with graphics.
Although I don't really see the point you are making with respect to
instructions I am not worried: I am not using these graphics to provide
instructions but to draw readers attention to certain system states the device
has to be in (RUN, PROGRAM, ALARM, etc.) **before** certain instructions can be
executed.
Nevertheless you got me wondering - maybe you can elaborate (maybe start
another thread on this)? I mean: if [0] represents a random button graphic (not
necessarily the zero key on your keypad I presume) why would the reader be
tempted to press zero three times (he/she may be tempted to press the intended
button three times, but that's what you want, isn't it?)
Vriendelijke groet / Kind regards,
?
Dick Spierings
?
' +31 (0)413 343786
"? www.fluidwell.com
w d.spierings at fluidwell.com
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Simon BUCH [mailto:simon.buch at m-ais.com]
Verzonden: dinsdag 18 mei 2010 12:11
Aan: Dick Spierings; framers at lists.frameusers.com
CC: Rick Quatro
Onderwerp: RE: reversed text style
Hello Dick,
If you're wanting to keep the 'reverse' text inside a line of text, you'll
probably want to make them into drawn graphics on one of the reference pages,
or import them as GIF/PNG graphics, and then paste them into your document,
using anchored frames.
I am a stickler for simplicity in documents, and I've found that putting
instructions in paragraphs can lead to confusion for some users. For example:
I've seen some documents (where [0] is a button graphic) which have
instructions like:
To get back to the menu, Press [0] [0] [0].
... and I've seen some trainees diligently type: 000.
Hope that helps
// Simon BUCH
-----Original Message-----
From: Dick Spierings [mailto:d.spieri...@fluidwell.com]
Sent: 18 May 2010 10:36
To: Simon BUCH; framers at lists.frameusers.com
Cc: Rick Quatro
Subject: RE: Mogelijke spam (volgens TM Srv01 content scan): RE: reversed text
style
Hi Simon,
The idea of installing a new typeface would be the most straight forward and
simple solution if not that I too foresee printing problems. So after reading
Rick's suggestion (which makes good sense: I didn't think of it!) I decided to
rule that option out.
Back to Art Campbell's suggestion: if you do use a single cell table with black
background, how do you then keep it in line with the remainder of the text like
you can with an anchored frame? (Tables have no "at insertion point" anchoring
position, anchored frames do.) Note that I am talking about a single word
somewhere in the paragraph, not an entire paragraph.
Vriendelijke groet / Kind regards,
?
Dick Spierings
?
' +31 (0)413 343786
"? www.fluidwell.com
w d.spierings at fluidwell.com
