I like the Example title on top, because it gives the context before the content, which is an important mental flow for digestion.
Otherwise, as an immediate example: I have a document that I'm working on where I transition from an imperative procedure to an example. The reader is lulled into a mental state of submissively following instructions by the terse imperative instruction of the procedure. As they succumb to the procedure's beacon of clear direction amidst an otherwise complex and uncertain world, the reader needs to do a mental context switch to process the information in the example as an *example*, rather than verbatim direction. Processing an example requires critical thinking, discrimination, and a level of abstract thinking that is antithetical to the surrendered trance-like state induced by empowered procedure construction. The better written the procedure is, the more pronounced the mental shift will need to be. Having the example title and the tag "Example" at the bottom causes the context switch to happen too late, and the reader has to go back and re-evaluate the example box contents. Writing an introductory note along the lines of "the following is an example" indicates that the "Example" identifier should precede the example itself. It will cause the reader to mentally shift gears to process the information that follows. It is the extreme case, but imagine a case where a particularly empowered procedure is read by a susceptible reader during just the right astrological conditions - if it is followed by an example that instructs the reader that they are a chicken, or demonstrates a command such as "rm -rf /", it might be too late by the time they reach the safe word "Example". I vote for "Example" in the title of an example, rather than beneath it. On 10/11/2010 04:22 PM, Joshua Wulf wrote: > On a more serious note, would this be related to: > > https://engineering.redhat.com/trac/ContentServices/wiki/FY11GoalPlan#Useability > > > On 10/11/2010 04:16 PM, Joshua Wulf wrote: >> On 10/11/2010 04:02 PM, Jeff Fearn wrote: >>> On Mon, 2010-10-11 at 01:59 -0400, Misty Stanley-Jones wrote: >>>> ----- "Jeff Fearn" <jfe...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> None of the people who have credibility in the layout area have given >>>>> any feed back on your suggestions. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Who are these people? >>> >>> Ryan, Brian, and Rudi ... I hear Brian has an excuse :( >>> >>> Cheers, Jeff. >>> >> >> I thought it looked good. >> >> <secrethandshake role="illuminati"/> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> publican-list mailing list >> publican-list@redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/publican-list >> Wiki: https://fedorahosted.org/publican > > _______________________________________________ > publican-list mailing list > publican-list@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/publican-list > Wiki: https://fedorahosted.org/publican _______________________________________________ publican-list mailing list publican-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/publican-list Wiki: https://fedorahosted.org/publican
