Discussions from Technical Editing
It is our standard practice, in most cases, to identify the result of the user's action. For example: - From the Search menu, click Client. The Client Search screen appears. - Type the client ID and click Search. Results are displayed in the Client List. We try to make the procedural steps as generic as possible, especially when results may differ with each attempt. And, as Todd mentioned, user's do not like to read any more than necessary. So, keep the steps simple and add a screen image to help illustrate complex procedures.
We're glad you've renewed your Technical Editing SIG membership, Marcia. We look forward to having you with us in 2013.
Editing for Information Accessibility ("Mind the Gap"):2011 Presentation and Technical Editing SIG Membership Meeting
Hi Anne: The TE SIG holds quarterly meetings/webinars. You can find out more on the SIG's website: http://stc-techedit.org Select Events > About our Meetings.
Try Jing, they have a free version that I have used for some time and find it's really good. They have both a Mac and a PC version: http://www.techsmith.com/jing-features.html
It does depend on your processes, who's involved, the broader culture, industry, and so on. Once upon a time I worked in a drug and medical device labelling group; we were part of Quality and had to do the same business improvement/lean/etc. stuff that everyone else did. Processes and procedures got written up, were subject to audit, and there was hell to pay for non-compliance.
Is it necessary to mention the "password" since it's irrelevant? How about: "This feature allows an application to communicate with RWS using a token and an application ID."
@Debbie: Well, that is progress! Please let us know if you receive anymore multiple notifications by posting a discussion or wall post to the My STC Feedback group or the Get Satisfaction via the "Feedback" tab on the side of the screen. @Rick: Thanks for the reply. I will keep looking into this issue.
I was actually looking at that one, Gillian, because when I went to look for "Writing in the Open," I discovered it is now out of print. And the reviewer on Amazon.com suggested reading "Read Me First" instead. Glad to see another recommendation for it.