I’m not sure how many others are reading the online book but it is terribly designed. Ironic that the first chapter we read in the book is about design and it is poorly designed.
Chapter 24 discusses the use of images and charts in a document. I really liked the checklist that they had that showed what you need to do when using an image. Things like labeling them and putting the copyright information are a few of the guidelines that I frequently forget to follow. Having this checklist will definitely be useful in the future. The chapter also talked about how to take screenshots and how to put graphs in documents. Not too difficult to do if you know your way around computers.
Now for the Instructor Blog #5 and my complaints about the textbook. First of all I thought that there was nothing wrong with the new Tropicana design. Was it different? Yes. Was it really that hard to adjust to? No. While it would have been wise for Pepsi to do better testing before rolling out the new design, I also think that they should have stuck to their guns and not changed back to the old design. Is wasting all that time and money really worth it just to satisfy a few people who can’t handle change? Nope.
Two things that really struck me from the Instructors Blog was “good design in invisible” and “good design guides the eye”. The reason that these caught my eye was these were things that I felt the online version of the textbook did quite poorly. First of all, while the comment is made that you don’t notice good design I feel that you quickly notice poor design. The second I started reading the textbook I thought it was poorly designed. Essentially having four columns with the second column flowing into the third column with the outside columns containing other (extra?) information is quite distracting. Maybe reading a hardcopy of the book would be easier but I haven’t read it so I wouldn’t know. These also go against the “good design guides the eye” tenet. What am I supposed to read and when? While reading this my eyes were jumping all over the page. I believe that the biggest thing that is wrong with this version is that it makes “raiding” very difficult. The reader can’t easily tell what is important and can’t easily find what they are looking for.
While I’m glad I bought the online version cause it was a lot cheaper than the hard copy, it would have been nice if it were a little easier to read.
Same problem with the print textbook
If you're referring to the Thomson Handbook, I sometimes have the same reaction to the hard copy version of the textbook that you do to the online design. I'm not sure if they're the same, but sometimes I feel bombarded by the colors and multiple pieces on the page. It's a great resource for one or two little snippets of info, but I don't get a clear sense of hierarchy or organization from it, which was one of the points of design in the readings. Maybe there's not a hierarchy or organization, but I sometimes feel that if the information were presented in a more logical or organized fashion, I wouldn't skip around so much and potentially miss things being covered.
Kristin
Depicting Information from the textbook
I agree you both due to how easy it is to miss information due to the layout of the book. After reading through some blogs, I sometimes wonder where they have read the information at. After going back through the book and finding my newly acquired information is really annoying. I rely on the book being a good source of information due to the fact that is required for this class. I find the best way for me to read it is to read it about 2 or 3 times to understand what information is necessary.
Zebulon Rouse
Responses to Design
Andy, you demonstrate an important point about design here: namely, that a designer can never fully satisfy all audiences. In another comment, Jeremy has argued that "good" and "bad" "are completely situated concepts." Some may find a design effective given their needs, values, and expectations, while others may not. This, again, points to feedback from consumers and users is an important component of successful technical writing (your overly dismissive "a few people who can’t handle change" hides the fact that the response to the Tropicana redesign was apparently overwhelmingly negative, and a similar response would be, you would agree, an unhelpful response to your own complaints about the textbook). Additionally, sticking to your guns, while at times necessary, runs the risk of alienating users (which is an ethical issue). Successful technical communicators should not be so quick to resist critical feedback. As you enter the usability phase of the project, you should be open to the possibility that you will need to revise your original documents.
Note: be sure that you focus your reading responses more on how you will use the readings to inform your own work and less on the quality of the readings themselves. We certainly appreciate feedback on the materials we offer, but you (and your classmates) will get much more from the readings if you use them to assess your own work rather than the sources themselves.
Clarification
I admit that I might have been overly dismissive about the response to Tropicana's redesign. I just didn't see what the big deal was. It's an orange juice carton. I also understand the part about sticking to your guns but that the same time I think that there is something to be said about waiting the storm out so to speak. Flipping after less than 3 weeks on the market (based in the dates of the stories). That's hardly enough time to even see if the new design led to decreased sales. Yes, any time sales are lost it is a bad thing. But flushing all that money down the toilet because some people didn't like it seems quite wasteful to me. I would seriously doubt that people would stop buying Tropicana because of how it looks. In a few weeks they'll be up in arms over something else and totally forget this happened. There is always a little discomfort when familiar things change but that doesn't mean the change is bad.
And while the designer can't satisfy all audiences, after reading some of the other responses and comments I'm pretty sure the TH has almost no one satisfied.
Andy