Confused by the RM manual...

[96RAF]

I've been reading the RM manual (sorry but I was bored as Lewis was forced out of F1 qualifying for technical problems).

 

I looked in particular at saving routes and found this ( Groups - which I have used before with no problem).

 

/media/tinymce_upload/a2d87d4326116ebb440275dcd6c18b02.PNG

 

In the Groups box centre stage above in blue text are 2 routes (Main Line and Siding B to Siding D) that have been generated by putting information into each point on the track plan (by way of right click) in Design Mode.

 

These selections then automatically list up in that screen box, for future selection, the ability to set in this case either route as shown here. (Note that there is a finite limit to the number of these routes as indicated below - given your layout has so many routes as to be able to exceed the limit.)

 

/media/tinymce_upload/d31bcf1ee742261f6a66c02df059ed7d.PNG

 

Later on in the manual RM states this, but doesn't actually explain very well how we got here, although it is reasonably obvious from the above steps.

 

/media/tinymce_upload/35a228099ec0c84c0c303d8d5c57062c.PNG

Going critically through the manual I find there are several places where I am not sure of how to do things that are stated as '...you can do this, etc...'

Could the RM manual please be amended to better explain how we achieve these various events.

I would advise the scrutiny of a professional Technical Author.

[96RAF]

Edit: - it sent before I had revised what I actually wanted to say in that last line of my previous post, which sounds a bit disparinging to RM - not what I had in mind at all....

 

I meant to say:  I would advise RM to involve Hornby Technical Author department to formally review the manual in the light of user comments and look at making the overall content more comprehensive.

[Augustus Caesar]

You could say, RAF, that this is the case with many manuals around differing subjects.

 

It annoys me when one buys a laptop, for example, and the User Guide is supposed to tell the 'user' how to do things and at what stage to do them and why. But does it? Of course not. That would take up too much paper, too much time to write it and a team of 'experts' all working to the same standard.

 

You are absolutely correct to ask though. When I do my step by step instructions for anything, not just the RM Help Site, I always do them so they are idiot proof to the best possible standard and are simple to read and understand. I always go back and at least try to see if a reference has already been made to something and what it was I stated. That way I can use better wordage to describe the area of concern in both scenarios with a better shape to it.

 

The majority of the problems here are where those producing these manuals simply make the mistake that we will all suddenly grasp everything there is to know about the software/hardware very quickly and see no reason to bore the trousers off those who already know anyway how to do things like the complicated stuff.

 

While I do understand what they say when describing the fact that it would cost too much to produce them, with no inaccuracies and far better descriptions, though on DVD, CD or online, it would not though. The other reason they don't is so the likes of us can use a forum like this to ask questions so the users can answer for them. Now what could be cheaper than that? 😀

 

However, where a manual does fall down is where you rightly say it either doesn't describe items accurately, leaves steps out or even contradicts itself. Too many manuals do this and although I haven't fully read the RM version I would be curious to see how many times it does that...

 

But, yes, a better described set of instructions where differing paragraphs can at least talk of the same thing correctly and accurately would be better. Manuals should never be skimped on... by anyone.

[96RAF]

@AC

I was taught as a rookie Tech Author that no book should ever repeat what another book has said as they will soon get out of step. It should all be done by cross reference from the master tome.

 

There was even a priority of order that these specialised books should lay out their information in, so that you always knew if book B said something different to book A, then book A was the master document and book B was out of kilter and hadn't caught up with those amendments.

 

Such cross referencing is critical - for instance you only have to look at the Elite manual alongside the R8216/8247 Accessory Decoder manuals to see there is a yawning chasm of differring how-to's. As a novice user I would be totally confused reading both at once as to which to use, and if working in isolation from the wrong document then I'd be led right up the garden path and in the wrong direction.