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.
Subject:FW: Re: chapter-based numbering From:Millman_Harvey <millman -at- JMBCORP -dot- MHS -dot- COMPUSERVE -dot- COM> Date:Wed, 15 Mar 1995 13:24:15 EST
I sent this only to Bev by mistake. Should have gone to the list. -- Harv
----------
From: Millman_Harvey
To: Beverly Parks
Subject: Re: Re: chapter-based numbering
Date: Wednesday, March 15, 1995 8:40AM
The navigation issue can be either "Which chapter am I in?" (in which
case "chapter-page" numbers help), or "How far am I into the book?"
(in which case "ch.-p." tells you nothing). Try telling the print
shop how many pages you've got to copy when pages are numbered that
way. Fun! Both formats have their uses and their shortcomings.
On a related issue, I think the absence of headers with chapter info
is just lousy design, and shouldn't be justification for one numbering
style or the other.
Has anyone else heard this "c-n" numbering called "page by folio"?
----------
>From: Beverly Parks
>To: Millman_Harvey
>Subject: Re: Re: chapter-based numbering
>Date: Tuesday, March 14, 1995 7:10PM
>Sender: techwr-l -at- vm1 -dot- ucc -dot- okstate -dot- edu
>Received: from VM1.ucc.okstate.edu by arl-img-3.compuserve.com
>(8.6.10/5.941228sam)
> id TAA02117; Tue, 14 Mar 1995 19:04:54 -0500
>Message-Id: <199503150004 -dot- TAA02117 -at- arl-img-3 -dot- compuserve -dot- com>
>Received: from OSUVM1.BITNET by VM1.ucc.okstate.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
> with BSMTP id 7288; Tue, 14 Mar 95 18:06:50 CST
>Received: from VM1.UCC.OKSTATE.EDU by OSUVM1.BITNET (Mailer R2.08 R208004)
>with
> BSMTP id 6291; Tue, 14 Mar 95 13:54:37 CST
>Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 12:37:16 MST
>Reply-To: Beverly Parks <bparks -at- HUACHUCA-EMH1 -dot- ARMY -dot- MIL>
>Sender: "Technical Writers List; for all Technical Communication issues"
> <TECHWR-L -at- VM1 -dot- ucc -dot- okstate -dot- edu>
>From: Beverly Parks <bparks -at- HUACHUCA-EMH1 -dot- ARMY -dot- MIL>
>Subject: Re: chapter-based numbering
>Comments: To: TechWrite List <techwr-l -at- vm1 -dot- ucc -dot- okstate -dot- edu>
>To: Multiple recipients of list TECHWR-L <TECHWR-L -at- VM1 -dot- ucc -dot- okstate -dot- edu>
>Arlen Walker made the following comment on the practice of
>page-numbering chapters independently, such as
> 1-1, 1-2, 1-3, new chapter: 2-1, 2-2, 2-3...
> Can I say that I *hate* that practice, as a user? I know all
> the production advantages of it. But truth is, it makes it
> much more difficult to find things in the manual.
> [excellent examples clipped]
>===========
>Bravo! Arlen, you're the first person I've heard to complain
>about this, but I suspect there are many, many more who feel as
>you do. I agree with you completely. It does nothing but add an
>extra layer of navigation to get to the desired page number.
> =*= Beverly Parks =*= bparks -at- huachuca-emh1 -dot- army -dot- mil =*=
> =*= "Unless otherwise stated, all comments are my own. =*=
> =*= I am not representing my employer in any way." =*=
