4 ms·
"Topic-centric" is already a thing in technical writing. It produces those mystery-meat help systems you find in larger applications where you can find informat
by chipsy 10y ago
"Topic-centric" is already a thing in technical writing. It produces those mystery-meat help systems you find in larger applications where you can find information about a specific piece of functionality piecemeal, and if you're lucky also a tutorial that tells you how to put it together into a larger workflow. If you're unlucky, it manages to summarize the parts you already knew without telling you about any details or pitfalls.
The graph is useful for note-taking and exploration, certainly, but it produces a design constraint that isn't always situationally appropriate. Binding things into a narrative can add a lot of value.
- TheOtherHobbes 10y agoTechnical writing traditions are mostly evidence-free bullshit that focusses on appearances at the expense of usefulness. I usually find "official" technical docs very hard to read - much harder to follow and less useful than a typical how-to book. Writing is not code. Human elements like humour and story-telling make technical content much easier to understand and learn. And "topic centric" should be something that comes out of testing. User testing should note the most common user taskflows empirically, and write those up in the docs.