[publican-list] RFE for Publican Brands

[Joshua Wulf]

I like the Example title on top, because it gives the context before the
content, which is an important mental flow for digestion.

Otherwise, as an immediate example: I have a document that I'm working
on where I transition from an imperative procedure to an example. The
reader is lulled into a mental state of submissively following
instructions by the terse imperative instruction of the procedure. As
they succumb to the procedure's beacon of clear direction amidst an
otherwise complex and uncertain world, the reader needs to do a mental
context switch to process the information in the example as an
*example*, rather than verbatim direction. Processing an example
requires critical thinking, discrimination, and a level of abstract
thinking that is antithetical to the surrendered trance-like state
induced by empowered procedure construction. The better written the
procedure is, the more pronounced the mental shift will need to be.

Having the example title and the tag "Example" at the bottom causes the
context switch to happen too late, and the reader has to go back and
re-evaluate the example box contents.

Writing an introductory note along the lines of "the following is an
example" indicates that the "Example" identifier should precede the
example itself. It will cause the reader to mentally shift gears to
process the information that follows.

It is the extreme case, but imagine a case where a particularly
empowered procedure is read by a susceptible reader during just the
right astrological conditions - if it is followed by an example  that
instructs the reader that they are a chicken, or demonstrates a command
such as "rm -rf /", it might be too late by the time they reach the safe
word "Example".

I vote for "Example" in the title of an example, rather than beneath it.

On 10/11/2010 04:22 PM, Joshua Wulf wrote:
> On a more serious note, would this be related to:
> 
> https://engineering.redhat.com/trac/ContentServices/wiki/FY11GoalPlan#Useability
> 
> 
> On 10/11/2010 04:16 PM, Joshua Wulf wrote:
>> On 10/11/2010 04:02 PM, Jeff Fearn wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2010-10-11 at 01:59 -0400, Misty Stanley-Jones wrote:
>>>> ----- "Jeff Fearn" <jfearn at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> None of the people who have credibility in the layout area have given
>>>>> any feed back on your suggestions.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Who are these people?
>>>
>>> Ryan, Brian, and Rudi ... I hear Brian has an excuse :(
>>>
>>> Cheers, Jeff.
>>>
>>
>> I thought it looked good.
>>
>> <secrethandshake role="illuminati"/>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> publican-list mailing list
>> publican-list at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/publican-list
>> Wiki: https://fedorahosted.org/publican
> 
> _______________________________________________
> publican-list mailing list
> publican-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/publican-list
> Wiki: https://fedorahosted.org/publican