#Standard symbols
7 messages in this thread
Hi everyone,
During AU the most frequent complaint was that either a class/session was too
basic or too advanced. The class descriptions seldom indicated the level of
difficulty. I discussed this with Ken Flesher and we joked that symbols similar
to those at ski areas would be helpful. Wayne H. got wind of the idea…..he's
everywhere…… and agreed that symbols would be helpful.
I'm posting the thread here to start a discussion on how we might best
accomplish this. Oops, my electricity just went off so I'm on backup battery!
I'll have to type fast.
The basic idea is simple, concise symbols along the lines of the Olympics. My
idea is to convey three things; Level of difficulty, Autodesk product,
subproduct i.e Basic/AutoCAD/AME.
The symbols must be printable at all print qualities.
What do you all think.
TedB
Let me know what you all think
Ted –
Wonderful idea. I know I hit a couple of classes that were, well,
a rehash of things I usually teach. A catagorization of levels will
help me, and others choose from among the varied tracks (ie, from
advanced AutoCAD, intermediate 3DS, etc.) without guessing.
Also, I was a bit disappointed with two classes that had no "live"
demonstrations, meaning that they were a "slide show" of bulleted points,
akin to a lecture, always appropriate to the topic, but not demonstrating
it _directly_ on the platform/product. Obviously, I don't want to point
at a specific conference, but would like to know ahead of time if that
is what I'll be getting. Perhaps this isn't a realistic request, but
maybe we can go thru some refinement here.
|-\\/
Todd
The symbols would be developed for training materials initially within the
ATC/LSG system, I believe, so wouldn't pertain to NAAUG functions for now. I
was using that as an example only and we'd have to check with Autodesk on how
"public" they would be. That said, the symbols would be used on hand-on
exercises more than likely but your concerns would be a good subject to bring
up with the NAAUG.
I suppose the first thing we should decide is what is the breakdown of
topics/levels in outline form then develop the appropriate symbols. Any
thoughts on that?
Thanks,…. talk to you later.
TedB
Ted:
Actually, your excellent symbol idea could have many applications – books,
video-tape training, tutorials, etc. in addition to the ATC and NAAUG classes.
Would make more sense to people if they saw it used universally, anyway, and
many of us would know it from skiing, besides (even those of us here in
Southern California)!
In fact, I nominate you to be the clearing house for all books and tapes, to
make sure that there is a consistent standard applied to all of them, like
the movie ratings! <g,d,& r!>
Greg Pyros
Oh great! Now we are going to have "symbols police" and better yet, Ted is
going to be chief! Wow, the mind boggles don't it?!?!?! <bg>
Re the question of how far and wide do we want to distribute them? …..
UNIVERSALLY!! Everywhere and anywhere. What I will want to insist on is
CONSISTENCY and CLARITY!!
OK, so let's go with this. As per my original message, I think what is next is
to identify a list of appropriate items worthy and deserving of a symbol. I do
NOT think we need to or want to be looking for a lengthy list, just those
things that are often requiring pointing out, will make it easier and clearer
to communicate the message. Soooo, here is the opening again, let's hear from
everyone as to what they think is appropriate to "symbolize"? We have the
first item: DIFFICULTY Symbol = Ski hill symbols, SQ-CIRCLE-DIAMOND
Next, ……….
ww
Wayne:
>> Next, ……
What about pieces of software? IPAS routines? Installation of hardware?
Operating systems? Jigsaw puzzles? Crosswords?
The mind truely boggles!
Greg Pyros