An online advisory system is described which offers guidelines and recommendations for text writers. The system tries to meet two essential requirements: easy switching from the text processing software to the online advice, and optimal access which enables the user to find relevant materials as easy as possible. The authors describe some studies with prototypes of the system. An analysis of information-seeking behavior yields some fundamental issues to be investigated in order to improve the usefulness of the system in the future.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
LentzL. and de VetD., Tekstschrijver als beroep (Text Writer as a Profession), Communicatief, 5:1, pp. 3–11, 1993.
2.
JansenC., Computerized Writing Aids: Do They Really Help? in Quality of Technical Documentation, SteehouderM. F. (eds.), Utrecht Studies in Language and Communication, Vol. 3, Rodopi, Amsterdam/Atlanta, 1994.
3.
SchneiderM. and TanisP., Solliciteren met CATS. Onderzoek naar de bruikbaarheid van de adviezen die het schrijfadviessysteem CATS geeft t.a.v. het schrijven van een sollicitatiebrief (Applying for a Job with CATS. A Study of the Usability of the Recommendations for Writing Application Letters, Provided by the Writing Advisory System CATS), unpublished paper, Centre for Language and Communication, Utrecht University, 1993.
4.
TanisP., Online schrijfadviezen in hypertekst. Een onderzoek naar de vormgeving van het schrijfadviesprogramma CATS (Online Guidelines for Writers. A Study of the Design of the Writing Advisory System CATS), unpublished paper, Centre for Language and Communication, Utrecht University, 1993.
5.
SteehouderM., The Quality of Access: Helping Users Find Information in Documentation, in Quality of Technical Documentation, SteehouderM. F. (eds.), Utrecht Studies in Language and Communication, Vol. 3, Rodopi, Amsterdam/Atlanta, 1994.
6.
VernoyM., Experimenteel onderzoek probleemherkenning en representatie (Experimental Study on Problem Recognition and Representation), unpublished report, Centre for Language and Communication, Utrecht University, 1993.
7.
NasG., Collecting Descriptions of Text Processing Problems for a User Friendly Manual, in Quality of Technical Documentation, SteehouderM. F. (eds.), Utrecht Studies in Language and Communication, Vol. 3, Rodopi, Amsterdam/Atlanta, 1994.
8.
KegelS.SienotM., and van der WalA., De effectiviteit van twee soorten online documentatie (The Effectiveness of Two Types of Online Documentation), unpublished paper, Centre for Language and Communication, Utrecht University, 1994.
9.
JansenC. and SteehouderM., Improving the Text of a Public Leaflet, Information Design Journal, 4, pp. 10–18, 1984.
10.
JansenC. J. M.SteehouderM. F.PilotA.SchrauwenD., and LooijmansP. J. M., ALEXIS: Computer-assisted Feedback on Written Assignments, Computer and Composition, 4, pp. 32–45, 1986.
11.
SteehouderM. and JansenC., From Bureaucratic Language to Instructional Texts: How to Design an Effective Problem-solving Tool for Citizens, Information Design Journal, 5, pp. 129–139, 1987.
12.
SteehouderM. and JansenC., Optimizing the Quality of Forms, in Studies in Functional Text Quality, Pander MaatH. and SteehouderM. F. (eds.), Editions Rodopi, Amsterdam, pp. 159–172, 1992.
13.
JansenC. and SteehouderM., Forms as a Source of Communication Problems, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 22, pp. 179–194, 1992.
14.
SteehouderM.JansenC.van der PoortP., and VerheijenR. (eds.), Quality of Technical Documentation, Rodopi, Amsterdam/Atlanta, Georgia, 1994.
