todd@stiatl.UUCP (Todd Merriman) (03/24/90)
> What's the best size paper to use in software documentation? > Before the advent of the PC, 8.5 x 11 was the most common size; but > now 6 x 8.5 seems to be the most popular. Which do you prefer? > Would it make any difference in your choice of software packages if > you could choose between the two? > The previous post produced some very clear-cut preferences for manual size. Most technical people prefer 8.5 x 11, about 2:1, with a substantial additional number prefering A4 (the international standard, 210 x 297mm). ...!emory!stiatl!todd Todd Merriman * 404-841-4000 * Atlanta, GA
jcmorris@mwunix.mitre.org (Joe Morris) (03/24/90)
In article <9485@stiatl.UUCP> todd@stiatl.UUCP (Todd Merriman) writes: >> What's the best size paper to use in software documentation? >> Before the advent of the PC, 8.5 x 11 was the most common size; but >> now 6 x 8.5 seems to be the most popular. Which do you prefer? [...] > Most technical people prefer 8.5 x 11, about 2:1, with >a substantial additional number prefering A4 (the international >standard, 210 x 297mm). OK, how about a related question: should documentation be in loose-leaf format or bound? If bound, how? My personal preference (regardless of the paper size) is for loose-leaf format for any manual which I'm likely to need on a routine basis. Two reasons for this are: * If I'm referring to it while I'm at the keyboard it is rather distracting to have the pages turn themselves. If I put something on the pages to keep them flat then by definition some info I need will be under the "something". The problem exists with either perfect-bound or stapled manuals; spiral-bound books aren't that bad. * With loose-leaf binders I can add extra pages describing extra features, bugs, workarounds, etc just by punching holes into a piece of scrap paper. With bound volumes this isn't practical: paper-clipped notes prevent the book from closing; loose paper falls out when I'm not looking, and I usually have too much material to write in the margins. Then, there are always extra pages I like to stuff in the pocket in the front cover of the binder... I don't have any problem with binding of installation, setup, or other introduction-type manuals, since I normally use them once and never open them again. Part of the reason for asking this question is that Microsoft has published the documentation for Word for Windows in the form of a hardback book. Also, the Excel functions and macros documentation is now a perfect-bound where it used to be in loose-leaf format. I don't like them. How sayeth the jury? Do you prefer loose-leaf, perfect/staple bound, or hardback for documentation?
cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) (03/24/90)
In article <9485@stiatl.UUCP> todd@stiatl.UUCP (Todd Merriman) writes: >The previous post produced some very clear-cut preferences for >manual size. Most technical people prefer 8.5 x 11, about 2:1, with >a substantial additional number prefering A4 (the international >standard, 210 x 297mm). I prefer the smaller 8.5x5.5. The smaller size makes it easier to handle/ layout on the desktop and I can get two of them into my brief case. -- Conor P. Cahill (703)430-9247 Virtual Technologies, Inc., uunet!virtech!cpcahil 46030 Manekin Plaza, Suite 160 Sterling, VA 22170
donlash@uncle.UUCP (Donald Lashomb) (03/25/90)
In article <9485@stiatl.UUCP> todd@stiatl.UUCP (Todd Merriman) writes: >The previous post produced some very clear-cut preferences for >manual size. Most technical people prefer 8.5 x 11, about 2:1, with >a substantial additional number prefering A4 (the international >standard, 210 x 297mm). I prefer the smaller 8.5x5.5 too. They fit on a bookshelf much better when not being used and take up less desk space when they are being used - especially when I've got 2 or 3 manuals openned at the same time on my desk. "Let's get real *small*" - Steve Martin -Don
donlash@uncle.UUCP (Donald Lashomb) (03/26/90)
I vote for 5.5 x 8.5 Loose Leaf -Don
nts0302@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil (Bob Fisher) (03/26/90)
From article <9485@stiatl.UUCP>, by todd@stiatl.UUCP (Todd Merriman): >> What's the best size paper to use in software documentation? >> Before the advent of the PC, 8.5 x 11 was the most common size; but >> now 6 x 8.5 seems to be the most popular. Size is of minor importance. My major concern is the BINDING ! I'll take spiral bound (acceptable) or loose leafe (better), but the publishers can put the glued spine manuals where the sun doesn't shine. A reference manual is extremely annoying to use if it tries to close by itself when I lay it down. If I break the spine to keep it open, it will soon be just a bunch of loose pages with glue on one edge. I realize that it is cheaper for the publishers to glue the edges of a paperback book, but spiral binding shouldn't be much more expensive. Spiral bound or looseleaf makes for more expensive packaging and shipping if for no other reason than size and protection from crushing the binding. I'M WILLING TO PAY IT. But there is a way for publishers to keep the price down. When I buy a "reference" book about an operating system or software package, I don't want 50 pages of useless drivel about the history of the beast. STICK TO THE SUBJECT. There seems to be a trend now to see who can write the thickest book. Thick books mean more words which means more money for the author. Verbosity doesn't measure the worth of the book. There are "reference" books that I would buy if they were half the size and would stay open to the page I want. How 'bout it, authors. Publishers. -- Bob Fisher US Defense Logistics Agency Systems Automation Center DSAC-TSX, Box 1605, Columbus, OH 43216-5002 614-238-9071 (AV 850-9071) bfisher@dsac.dla.mil osu-cis!dsacg1!bfisher
dar8808@cec1.wustl.edu (David A. Rochberg) (03/26/90)
Small loose-leaf : It lies flat when opened (An absolute must) and the pages are easy to turn. Book-form manuals look neato, but they are much harder to actually use. -David@david.wustl.edu
hunt@dg-rtp.dg.com (Greg Hunt) (03/27/90)
I definitely prefer 8.5" x 11" paper for documentation. I also prefer
it to be loose-leaf rather than bound in any fashion. It makes it
easier to read the page I've turned to when my hands are busy at the
keyboard. It's also easier for adding replacement pages for updates,
and for taking pages out when I need to look at lots of pages at once.
I can also punch holes in note paper and add them in easly if I need
to. I think this size paper is easier to read, probably mostly because
it's the size most other manuals that I deal with are printed in.
I don't like the little 6" x 8.5" manuals at all.
I prefer 11" x 8.5" paper for printouts, however. This is the same size
as 8.5" x 11" paper, but turned on it's side. It prints at 8 LPI
instead of 6 LPI, but can get 107 columns per page instead of 80.
That's real helpful for code listings and file displays, which tend to
be more than 80 columns wide. You don't have to deal with folding the
lines or truncating them. But hey, I'm a programmer. I do things
with computers that customers don't (the reverse is also true).
Another advantage of loose leaf bound manuals that I've recently found
out is that they're easier to recycle. Just chuck the cardboard front
and back pages that they usually have, and all the rest of the pages
can be recycled just like printout paper can be. At least that's what
our recyclying committee here told us.
--
Greg Hunt Internet: hunt@dg-rtp.dg.com
Data Management Development UUCP: {world}!mcnc!rti!dg-rtp!hunt
Data General Corporation
Research Triangle Park, NC These opinions are mine, not DG's.harrison@necssd.NEC.COM (Mark Harrison) (03/27/90)
My 2 cents:
1. I like 8.5 x 11 because it is easy to copy, and because it is easy
to punch holes in magazine articles, etc, and stick them in.
2. I like the boxes many 5.5 x 8.5 binders come in. One problem with
having a lot of looseleaf binders on a shelf is that the spine is
wider than the other end, and they don't stay on the shelf so well.
The boxes fix this.
3. For general reading, I like bound books. I don't like them for
reference stuff because they don't lie flat and they are too hard
to copy. (I heard a Borland guy give a talk, and being hard to
copy was one of the reasons they went with bound docs... the other
was the much lower price.)
the reasons
Note: the above references to copying should not be interpreted as
a cavalier approach to other's copyrights... I copy within
the restrictions of the US copyright code.
--
Mark Harrison harrison@necssd.NEC.COM
(214)518-5050 {necntc, cs.utexas.edu}!necssd!harrison
standard disclaimers apply...battan@qtc.UUCP (Jim Battan) (03/30/90)
I prefer documentation on-line! I can add to it, modify it, or remove it;
it doesn't waste trees; I can easily incorporate documents into others.
The only drawback is if the documentation you need to get a system
up and running is on that system. That happens very rarely.
--
Jim Battan {uunet!sequent,sun!nosun}!qtc!battan +1 503 626 3081
Quantitative Technology Corp 8700 SW Creekside Place Beaverton, OR 97005