[Sigia-l] Question about FAQs

[Mike.Steckel at sematech.org]

I very much agree with what Karl said below, and want to add something we do whenever possible that has worked out well. We have been trying to offer pieces of the FAQ to users at certain moments when they might have run into a problem.

For instance, when someone gets 0 hits on a search, we give them the section from the FAQ that deals with search tips for expanding a search. Also when they get over 300 results, we provide a link to the piece of the FAQ that helps them narrow their search if they wish to use it. 

This has been successful so far. We think of the FAQ as a single, rather long, document but try to link to pieces of it when we can tell a user might be looking at a screen they didn't expect to see.

-----Original Message-----
From: sigia-l-admin at asis.org [mailto:sigia-l-admin at asis.org]On Behalf Of
Karl Fast
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 7:41 AM
To: sigia-l at asis.org
Subject: Re: [Sigia-l] Question about FAQs



What follows is all personal opinion based experience as a user, not
any empirical or observational experience as a designer. Caveat
emptor. 

I have found two types of FAQs useful:

1. The Brief FAQ

   It's short. I can quickly skim it. It gives me a sense of common
   issues that I might run into. It's like a little test. If I pass,
   if I understand the FAQ, then I figure I'm doing real well.

2. The Detailed FAQ

   I love a detailed FAQ that summarizes a lot *more* information. I
   dislike FAQs that replace the real documentation. I may never need
   the real documentation, but I want to know it's there.  

   My favorite example is the FAQ for the VIM text editor. The
   FAQ is huge, but the documentation is huger (rhymes with luger?)

   http://vimdoc.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/vimfaq2html3.pl


There are at least three things to keep in mind when designing a FAQ:

1. The FAQ is not a replacement for the real documentation.

   It's merely an alternate representation of selected information.
   The VIM documentation is enormous. The FAQ brings out the
   important bits and presents it in a different, more useful way,
   considering the task context of the user.  

2. The FAQ should answer real questions, not PR questions. This
   advice comes from the Cluetrain (book, pg. 71):

   "There are two kinds of FAQs, I realized recently: 1) those that
   frame questions the company wants you to ask. Q: So how good ARE
   your products anyway? A: Very very VERY good!!!), and 2) those
   that acknowledge actual problems and provide solutions. The (1)
   variety is bulls**t PR, while (2) is truly useful."

3. Quick answers are the essence of a FAQ, thus design is critical.

   I loath FAQs which separate each answer into a separate page. You
   spend all your time pogosticking between the index and each
   individual entry. Such a design defeats the purpose of a FAQ:
   quick answers to common questions.

   For a brief FAQ, one big page is much better. People will scroll.

   For a detailed FAQ you can, maybe, divide the FAQ into
   chapter-like sections and create one page for each chapter. But
   hey, the VIM FAQ dumps it all on one page.


All IMHO, but hopefully of some help.


--karl
------------
When replying, please *trim your post* as much as possible.
*Plain text, please; NO Attachments

Searchable list archive:   http://www.info-arch.org/lists/sigia-l/
________________________________________
Sigia-l mailing list -- post to: Sigia-l at asis.org
Changes to subscription: http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigia-l