RE: Numbering Steps for Multiple Paths

[David Cramer <dacramer -at- videon -dot- wave -dot- ca>]

I still don't buy it. The number "1." for a step is a multipurpose
identifier that clarifies there is only one step, and it is a step just
like any other. Having number for some kinds of steps and not for others
implies that there's something different about the type of step it is.

Of course you need even more design stuff to clarify that unnumbered steps
are equal to numbered steps. That's because you took away their numbers!
Never complicate a layout by trying to simplify it.

Anyway, I would never use unnumbered steps, I mean, that's just weird ;-)

Regards,

David


>Agreement from here that a single-step procedure that uses "1." looks
>strange, if not silly. Like, say you were trying to get your teenager to
>take out the garbage, that's all, just one little task, you wouldn't say
>"First, take out the garbage." (Or maybe you would, just to mess with their
>head.)
>
>As a way of indicating that you're describing a procedure, and not just
>chatting, you can start the one-step procedure with "To..." which always
>gets the reader's attention. Or, you can use a nifty filled triangle
>character (icon) (bitmap) pointing to the right to call attention to the
>step. I would use either of those way before using step 1 all by itself.
>Actually, I would never use step 1 all by itself, I mean, that's just weird.
>
>
>- Scott M
>smiller -at- portal -dot- com


David Cramer, Process Innovation Evangelist          87-1313 Border Street
PBSC Computer Training Centres (an IBM company)      Winnipeg MB R3H 0X4
Corporate Office Research & Development              Canada