{"id":2949,"date":"2009-11-23T09:06:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-23T09:06:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/test.simple-talk.com\/uncategorized\/what-if-bad-documentation-gets-there-first\/"},"modified":"2016-07-28T10:49:49","modified_gmt":"2016-07-28T10:49:49","slug":"what-if-bad-documentation-gets-there-first","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.red-gate.com\/simple-talk\/blogs\/what-if-bad-documentation-gets-there-first\/","title":{"rendered":"What if bad documentation gets there first?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>I read an <a href=\"http:\/\/withpretext.com\/post\/211409986\/maps-and-legends-and-stacks-of-abstractions\">interesting blog snippet<\/a> a while ago about information visualizations and their capacity to set change our view of the world. It asks whether we as information designers have a moral responsibility to our users that governs how we model their worlds (&#8220;First, do no mimetic harm.&#8221;). <\/p>\n<p>I feel like that about documentation sometimes: it&#8217;s not ok to keep kicking the rescue dog, regardless of how used to that he is.<\/p>\n<p>I&#8217;ve spent a bit of time with the documentation for a very large, very serious and business-y product lately. We&#8217;ll be doing something in a similar sphere. Some of it is loathsome. There&#8217;s poor design, poor writing, typos, and inconsistencies. It&#8217;s hard to navigate, and harder to get quickly into and out of if you have a specific workflow problem. And its users lap it up. They laud it; it&#8217;s what they claim to want. <\/p>\n<p>This makes me sad. But is it better to pander to their lowered expectations, or take the moral high ground and give them help that, well, helps?<\/p>\n<p>At a glance, it&#8217;s a no-brainer. Existing documentation in the sphere is &#8220;bad&#8221; (my definition, admittedly), and a user-centred approach is &#8220;good&#8221;, so we&#8217;ll do it the good way, right?. But the bad documentation has set the expectations. So by making something that looks like the existing offering of obtuse reference tomes, we&#8217;d look less threatening, less unusual, maybe more serious and credible. Could it, pathological though this may seem, even be more usable?<\/p>\n<p>In that blog post, Andrew Walkingshaw argues that information representations can shape experiences more powerfully than we might first realise. We know that a bad (or worse, misleading) documentation experience has a detrimental effect on a user&#8217;s view of a product or brand, but what happens if the documentation is useful and true, but fails to match a pre-existing mental model?<\/p>\n<p>Do existing users really love the &#8220;bad&#8221; documentation, or are they just habituated to it, experiencing a contorted kind of of Stockholm Syndrome for manuals?<\/p>\n<p>It reminds me of a tweet a while ago, something like &#8220;If you knew it would increase revenue, would you change your website&#8217;s font to Comic Sans?&#8221; There&#8217;s a whole separate blog in that, but briefly, I&#8217;d want to know exactly what users were responding to, and why. <\/p>\n<p>I guess I feel just as queasy about high-handedly deciding I know what&#8217;s best as I do about continuing to kick the puppy. It comes back to content curation again &#8211; if it isn&#8217;t working as designed, we&#8217;ll have to revisit and likely change it. Still, it&#8217;s hard to know which way to go first. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>I read an interesting blog snippet a while ago about information visualizations and their capacity to set change our view of the world. It asks whether we as information designers have a moral responsibility to our users that governs how we model their worlds (&#8220;First, do no mimetic harm.&#8221;). I feel like that about documentation&#8230;&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":170602,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-2949","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-blogs"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.red-gate.com\/simple-talk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2949","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.red-gate.com\/simple-talk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.red-gate.com\/simple-talk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.red-gate.com\/simple-talk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/170602"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.red-gate.com\/simple-talk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2949"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.red-gate.com\/simple-talk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2949\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":24917,"href":"https:\/\/www.red-gate.com\/simple-talk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2949\/revisions\/24917"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.red-gate.com\/simple-talk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2949"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.red-gate.com\/simple-talk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2949"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.red-gate.com\/simple-talk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2949"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.red-gate.com\/simple-talk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=2949"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}