[HN Gopher] Advent of Technical Writing: Navigation Structure (D... ___________________________________________________________________ Advent of Technical Writing: Navigation Structure (Day 1 of 24) Author : zerojames Score : 36 points Date : 2023-12-02 19:03 UTC (3 hours ago) (HTM) web link (jamesg.blog) (TXT) w3m dump (jamesg.blog) | zerojames wrote: | Day two of this series is out, too): | https://jamesg.blog/2023/12/02/navigation-links/ | | Further reading on technical writers and startups (knowing your | audience, role, and more): | https://jamesg.blog/2023/11/27/technical-writing/ | | I welcome ideas for what I should write about in the series! I | have a couple of exciting ideas to explore; more would be | sincerely appreciated. | rocauc wrote: | In your inference project example, what examples do you place in | Getting Started vs common usage examples? In general, where is | the best place for usage examples - alongside the methods they | use, or in an independent section? | zerojames wrote: | Good question! Getting Started is where I put the information | someone needs to know to get started. This is based on two | things: | | 1. The minimum amount of information someone needs to use a | project. In this case, that is the "what is", and showing how | to run fine-tuned models. 2. Generally useful information that | someone can use to evaluate / understand the project. In this | case, supported devices. | | A reader could skip these if they know for what they are | looking, but if someone is new to the project a Getting Started | section equips them with what they need. | | For Python packages generally, I like to include an abridged | version of functionality in a quickstart / Getting Started | section. Then, usage examples can have either their own page, | or examples with example outputs that are in the code and are | propagated up through automated docs. [1] [2] | | For small packages, I usually fit all of it in a README; having | a strong quickstart, in all cases, is essential. [3] | | [1]: https://indieweb- | utils.readthedocs.io/en/latest/indieauth.ht... | | [2]: | https://supervision.roboflow.com/annotators/#supervision.ann... | (I didn't write this page, but I like the style and it is auto | generated from docstrings) | | [3]: https://microformats.github.io/mf2py/#quickstart | kaycebasques wrote: | "Advent of Technical Writing" is a great idea. Looking forward to | reading the whole series. | | In general it's very helpful to study lots of docs sites to get | fresh ideas about different ways to order docs. But I also | recommend being careful about apples-to-oranges comparisons. The | intuitive ordering for a narrow Python math library is probably | different than the intuitive ordering for a sprawling web | framework, for example. | ulnarkressty wrote: | Any ideas on how to help my engineer colleagues write good | documentation that actually helps? Most of the problems that I | see come from a lack of empathy - they assume the reader has | previous knowledge about things that are only inside their head, | so after reading the docs there's always the need for further | clarification. | | I suggested some technical writing courses, but they got weird | ideas from them, like writing documentation in a conversational | style, which makes it somehow even worse... | alpinisme wrote: | The key is not to focus on "what" needs documenting, but "how" | someone will use your documentation: to get set up, to consume | an api, to modify behavior, etc. If you write with the goal to | help someone with X problem do Y to solve it, the empathy | problem becomes a bit more tractable. | zerojames wrote: | Having the engineer pair with someone who has never used the | product before who also works in your org could help. I have a | blog post coming up about this soon! | | I wrote documentation for a product earlier this year. A | colleague with limited Python knowledge tried out the product | using my documentation live, on a call. I learned so much from | the process. We found bugs, we noticed that our documentation | didn't have one clear usage path, which was confusing, and | more. | | Watching someone work through your documentation was a bit | uncomfortable, but it really helped me. I plan to do it again | with another documentation project on my hands. | | Also, your colleague may need more direct feedback. I have | picked up a lot of tips from the person who edits my work. | Sometimes, I have an "aha" moment when I'm like "hm, this | approach really is better!" and I take it with me in all that I | write after that. | | > writing documentation in a conversational style | | The medium really matters. If the course was more about | tutorials, a conversational style can be appropriate, if kept | in check. If you are documenting open source software, it is | different. Your colleague probably picked up good tips, but the | course may not have shown how to use them properly. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-12-02 23:00 UTC)