Re: Standards for warning icons

[voxwoman <voxwoman -at- gmail -dot- com>]

Back in the day when I was working on documenting equipment that could maim
or kill you if used improperly, we used the following conventions: caution
for loss of data or equipment damage, warning for risk of bodily harm, and
danger for risk of death.

I've seen a lot of images for various forms of hazard (crushing, pinching,
spill, toxic, poison), not all covered in the original list in the OP.

If you have the opportunity for color in the document, making the warning
triangle red might help differentiate it from the note marker. For "note,"
I've seen the following used: a lightbulb, an image of a sticky-note, a
pencil, a pen nib, a pointing finger, and rarely, an exclamation mark (those
have usually been reserved for warnings or cautions).

My 21-quart pressure canner has a large red and orange warning label on the
lid and the side, that uses an exclamation mark and WARNING in all caps.
There are also 3 pages of warnings in the accompanying manual, with READ
THIS BEFORE USE in large type.

-Wendy

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Keith Hood <klhra -at- yahoo -dot- com> wrote:

> It looks to me like you have some in the list that are not really *warning*
> icons. Like the one for "ground" - that sounds to me like it's just an
> engineering notation. I think you need to rearrange things so you have
> easily identifiable differences between symbols that actually warn of
> physical dangers, and those that are only position/function markers.
>
> I would think you don't need a "safe" marker at all. Won't most users
> assume that something is safe unless it is marked as unsafe?


>
> The "warning" sign with the bang character inside a triangle is, I think
> pretty good as it is. It's pretty much a worldwide signage standard to use a
> triangle marker to alert people to an upcoming hazard. But for the "note"
> marker, get rid of the triangle. There's too much chance of it causing
> confusion over what is really a warning of potential danger and what is just
> information.
>
> Some of the things you mention, like the "fumes" marker, I would suggest
> keeping, but use them in tandem with the "warning" marker. If you have those
> symbols side by side, the user can very quickly deduce that there is a
> danger posed by a possible gas release - with those symbols together, he can
> get that information more quickly and easily than by reading a note that
> says fumes can be released.
>
> Ditch the "bodily injury" symbol. Aren't all warning markers supposed to be
> related to the chance of some kind of harm? There's no cotrast there -
> unless you're going to have a symbol to warn people of possible mental
> injury. I've seen some companies where that symbol should be painted on the
> front door.
>
>
> --- On Fri, 8/7/09, Nancy Allison <maker -at- verizon -dot- net> wrote:
>
> > From: Nancy Allison <maker -at- verizon -dot- net>
> > Subject: Standards for warning icons
> > To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> > Date: Friday, August 7, 2009, 11:30 AM
> > I need resources to figure out an
> > intelligent standard for warning icons for my client. I'm
> > working at a place that makes high-voltage equipment that is
> > used around the world by people with varying levels of
> > English competence, and the danger of electrocution is real.
> > By the way, I have no resources to do usability tests with
> > our international clients, so actual data from them is not
> > available to me.
> >
> > Currently, our template provides these icons:
> >
> > Bodily Injury
> > Burns!
> > Caution!
> > CE
> > Danger!
> > Explosion!
> > Eye!
> > Fire!
> > Fumes!
> > Ground
> > Input
> > Note!
> > Output
> > Poison!
> > Puncture!
> > Safe
> > Voltage!
> > Warning!
> >
> > Some are puzzling (Input, Output, Safe). If you know of a
> > standard that uses and explains them, please tell me about
> > it.
> >
> > In practice, I have seen only Note! and Warning! used in
> > documents. I don't even see Caution! used.
> >
> > The icons themselves are of varying clarity. The lightening
> > bolt for Voltage is probably pretty clear to most human
> > beings, but a lot of them are anybody's guess. The Note and
> > Warning icons are both an exclamation mark, one in a square
> > and one in a triangle. There's no significance to the shapes
> > that I know of. In short, the icons do not rise to the level
> > of a universally comprehensible visual language. To
> > complicate matters, the icons are labeled in English, with
> > Puncture! Fumes!, etc., as necessary. These labels will all
> > have to be translated in the subset of our documents that
> > *is* translated.
> >
> > My big question is, is it valuable to have all these
> > specific-but-confusing icons whose purpose is to indicate
> > the nature of the danger?
> >
> > Warning! clearly indicates to every reader that there is
> > physical danger, and they need to read the text in the big,
> > ugly, intrusive text box to find out what it is. Is there an
> > argument to be made for having a specific icon, like Eye!
> > (which shows a nerdy guy wearing glasses), so that readers
> > can probably figure out that there is physical danger, in
> > this case to their eyes?
> >
> > I believe that the overriding, compelling purpose of icons
> > is to make it instantly clear whether an action may kill or
> > injure a human being. (Secondarily, all other icons indicate
> > whether something may damage equipment or data, or may make
> > their life easier.)
> >
> > Whether the danger of bodily harm occurs through fumes,
> > punctures, etc., etc., is a distinctly secondary purpose.
> > Therefore, I'd like to get rid of all the specific danger
> > icons and use only the Warning icon. The text can explain
> > the specific danger.
> >
> > However, I'm not moving a muscle until I've researched this
> > issue thoroughly. Maybe there is a widely respected standard
> > that argues otherwise. If you document dangerous equipment
> > or processes, please tell me what standards you follow. If
> > there is a professional standard you adhere to, I would love
> > to know about it.  Thanks, all.
> >
> > --Nancy
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > Free Software Documentation Project Web Cast: Covers
> > developing Table of
> > Contents, Context IDs, and Index, as well as
> > Doc-To-Help
> > 2009 tips, tricks, and best practices.
> > http://www.doctohelp.com/SuperPages/Webcasts/
> >
> > Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for
> > individual
> > authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface.
> > Write
> > once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and
> > version control! http://www.helpandmanual.com/
> >
> > ---
> > You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as klhra -at- yahoo -dot- com -dot- 
> >
> > To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> > techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> > or visit
> http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/klhra%40yahoo.com
> >
> >
> > To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> >
> > Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- 
> > Visit
>
> > http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
> >
> > Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:
> > http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l-chat
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Free Software Documentation Project Web Cast: Covers developing Table of
> Contents, Context IDs, and Index, as well as Doc-To-Help
> 2009 tips, tricks, and best practices.
> http://www.doctohelp.com/SuperPages/Webcasts/
>
> Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for individual
> authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface. Write
> once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and version control!
> http://www.helpandmanual.com/
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as voxwoman -at- gmail -dot- com -dot- 
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> or visit
> http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/voxwoman%40gmail.com
>
>
> To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
> Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
> http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>
> Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:
> http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l-chat
>
>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Free Software Documentation Project Web Cast: Covers developing Table of
Contents, Context IDs, and Index, as well as Doc-To-Help  
2009 tips, tricks, and best practices.
http://www.doctohelp.com/SuperPages/Webcasts/

Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for individual
authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface. Write
once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and version control! http://www.helpandmanual.com/

---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- 

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/archive%40web.techwr-l.com


To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info. 

Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:
http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l-chat