TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
I often find figure numbering useful, but I've seen more than one major high-tech company that doesn't do it. Open an HP LaserJet user guide (try the HP LJ 1100 all-in-one or the HP LJ 2200), and you'll see that they typically don't number their figures or tables. (However, they DO number both in their service manuals.) A look at the PaintShop Pro 7 getting-started and reference guides, the Adobe Frame 7 guide, and the WebWorks Publisher 8 guides also demonstrates that figure numbering isn't a ubiquitous tech-comm practice. Is figure numbering a good practice? It depends. In some cases, figure numbers are additional visual noise. Do I like to use them? Sometimes.
Table numbering in many cases seems to make more sense to me. However, again, I wouldn't apply the "always include" approach here either. It depends on the context, the type of document I'm producing, and the audience I'm addressing.
So I would hire someone who doesn't use table or figure numbering, as long as that person omitted them for a good reason.
Bill Burns
Documentation Supervisor/MS Help MVP
Quality Design Systems
bburns -at- qds-solutions -dot- com
