Hi Walter.

I agree that the D3 Reference Manual could benefit from some improvement in the area of user-friendly content, examples and such.

I've been working with our documentation team to provide examples where there are none as well as to reword some topics that could benefit from a little "Engineering to English" translation. At this point I've only scratched the surface, but I'm committed to continue the process knowing that it's going to take a very long time.

The problem with something this vast is where does one start? For me, it was working customers' documentation-specific support cases and that has yielded some positive results. Additionally, in my daily use of the guide, where I used to stumble on an unclear topic and merely say "I hate this" and go about my business, I now try to take the time to improve the topic and submit the changes to our Information Development team. That has also yielded positive results.

There are two of your documentation requests I'm still working on that have to do with F- and A-correlative examples. I dropped the ball on those, apologies, but am picking it up again as we speak.

Going forward, if you have some specific topic areas that you feel need work, shoot me an email and I'll review them as part of the work I'm already doing. In the future, it may be better to open a 'documentation case' with MBS (VAR) when you come across something that needs improvement. In either case, please include the topic reference (D3 Reference Manual | Topic | Subtopic) and a few words about what is confusing or missing.

Sound like a plan?

Hi Walter.

I agree that the D3 Reference Manual could benefit from some improvement in the area of user-friendly content, examples and such.

I've been working with our documentation team to provide examples where there are none as well as to reword some topics that could benefit from a little "Engineering to English" translation. At this point I've only scratched the surface, but I'm committed to continue the process knowing that it's going to take a very long time.

The problem with something this vast is where does one start? For me, it was working customers' documentation-specific support cases and that has yielded some positive results. Additionally, in my daily use of the guide, where I used to stumble on an unclear topic and merely say "I hate this" and go about my business, I now try to take the time to improve the topic and submit the changes to our Information Development team. That has also yielded positive results.

There are two of your documentation requests I'm still working on that have to do with F- and A-correlative examples. I dropped the ball on those, apologies, but am picking it up again as we speak.

Going forward, if you have some specific topic areas that you feel need work, shoot me an email and I'll review them as part of the work I'm already doing. In the future, it may be better to open a 'documentation case' with MBS (VAR) when you come across something that needs improvement. In either case, please include the topic reference (D3 Reference Manual | Topic | Subtopic) and a few words about what is confusing or missing.

Sound like a plan?

Hi Walter.

I agree that the D3 Reference Manual could benefit from some improvement in the area of user-friendly content, examples and such.

I've been working with our documentation team to provide examples where there are none as well as to reword some topics that could benefit from a little "Engineering to English" translation. At this point I've only scratched the surface, but I'm committed to continue the process knowing that it's going to take a very long time.

The problem with something this vast is where does one start? For me, it was working customers' documentation-specific support cases and that has yielded some positive results. Additionally, in my daily use of the guide, where I used to stumble on an unclear topic and merely say "I hate this" and go about my business, I now try to take the time to improve the topic and submit the changes to our Information Development team. That has also yielded positive results.

There are two of your documentation requests I'm still working on that have to do with F- and A-correlative examples. I dropped the ball on those, apologies, but am picking it up again as we speak.

Going forward, if you have some specific topic areas that you feel need work, shoot me an email and I'll review them as part of the work I'm already doing. In the future, it may be better to open a 'documentation case' with MBS (VAR) when you come across something that needs improvement. In either case, please include the topic reference (D3 Reference Manual | Topic | Subtopic) and a few words about what is confusing or missing.

Sound like a plan?

Hi Walter.

I agree that the D3 Reference Manual could benefit from some improvement in the area of user-friendly content, examples and such.

I've been working with our documentation team to provide examples where there are none as well as to reword some topics that could benefit from a little "Engineering to English" translation. At this point I've only scratched the surface, but I'm committed to continue the process knowing that it's going to take a very long time.

The problem with something this vast is where does one start? For me, it was working customers' documentation-specific support cases and that has yielded some positive results. Additionally, in my daily use of the guide, where I used to stumble on an unclear topic and merely say "I hate this" and go about my business, I now try to take the time to improve the topic and submit the changes to our Information Development team. That has also yielded positive results.

There are two of your documentation requests I'm still working on that have to do with F- and A-correlative examples. I dropped the ball on those, apologies, but am picking it up again as we speak.

Going forward, if you have some specific topic areas that you feel need work, shoot me an email and I'll review them as part of the work I'm already doing. In the future, it may be better to open a 'documentation case' with MBS (VAR) when you come across something that needs improvement. In either case, please include the topic reference (D3 Reference Manual | Topic | Subtopic) and a few words about what is confusing or missing.

Sound like a plan?

Hi Walter.

I agree that the D3 Reference Manual could benefit from some improvement in the area of user-friendly content, examples and such.

I've been working with our documentation team to provide examples where there are none as well as to reword some topics that could benefit from a little "Engineering to English" translation. At this point I've only scratched the surface, but I'm committed to continue the process knowing that it's going to take a very long time.

The problem with something this vast is where does one start? For me, it was working customers' documentation-specific support cases and that has yielded some positive results. Additionally, in my daily use of the guide, where I used to stumble on an unclear topic and merely say "I hate this" and go about my business, I now try to take the time to improve the topic and submit the changes to our Information Development team. That has also yielded positive results.

There are two of your documentation requests I'm still working on that have to do with F- and A-correlative examples. I dropped the ball on those, apologies, but am picking it up again as we speak.

Going forward, if you have some specific topic areas that you feel need work, shoot me an email and I'll review them as part of the work I'm already doing. In the future, it may be better to open a 'documentation case' with MBS (VAR) when you come across something that needs improvement. In either case, please include the topic reference (D3 Reference Manual | Topic | Subtopic) and a few words about what is confusing or missing.

Sound like a plan?