«
»

If a system is built from various subsystems with their own usermanuals, isn’t there a contradiction?

Under Family Category: In News

:–
1. “system” usermanuals have been needed
2. if a complement usermanual differs during all from a subsystem usermanual, there is a guaranty as well as guilt problem.

I would consider a complement is not fit for role unless a subsystem usermanuals have been serviceable as “system” usermanuals.

I don’t know if this is at large recognized.

There contingency be projects where a lot of trivial work is done, formulating new “system” usermanuals. The “system” usermanuals have been combined new as well as talk about from a subsystem usermanuals. Such “system” usermanuals would crop up to be worthless.


If a system is built from various subsystems with their own usermanuals, isn’t there a contradiction? was posted and filed under In News family category. You can follow any responses to this entry when people search for through the feed.You can leave a response.

1 person has left a comment

It all depends on how you use the sub-systems. The manual for the overall system will probably explain what options each system uses and the inputs and outputs of each subsystem. For example, if you had a "system" that was comprised of the UNIX commands "ls -l" and "mkdir foo", you’d document that the first subsystem is the ls system, and it uses -l as an option, and the second subsystem is the mkdir system, and it uses foo as an option. So no, I don’t think these manuals are worthless.

icnintel wrote on November 6, 2009 - 11:12 pm | Visit Link

feel free to leave a comment

Comment Guidelines: Off-topic or inappropriate comments will be edited or deleted. Email addresses will never be published. Keep it PG-13 people!

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

All fields marked with " * " are required.

 

TopOfBlogs