Conference koolit::vms_curriculum

A draft of this module is available for review in:

	SUPER::ES$REVIEW:[RA0293]RA0293_CHAP_2_PROFILE.PS

    I found the flow of this chapter OK.
    My nits, typos and other observations are below.

    NOTE: These are my feelings etc. not of the UK as a whole.

    I comment on typos etc on instructor pages as well as customer pages.
    Instructors deserve to have unambiguous, correctly spelled and
    technically accurate information too! :-)
    
Page	Observation
----    -----------

1-7	Final line of table regarding comments. Add some text
	indicating that comments are a peculiarity of command
	procedures rather than interactive sessions. (I'm
	aware that on hardcopy consoles they are sometimes added
	for the benefit of logging).

1-13a	Mnemonics: for CTRL/H - Head; for CTRL/E - End

	Beware of wrapped command lines: left arrow key will only 
	return the cursor to the start of its current line. One
	needs to do repeated DELs to get to the end of the
	previous line(s).

1-15	While correcting the artwork have the word THINK less 
	bold. DCL doesn't print it that way.

1-20	Final bullet: too many "messages"!

A new version of this chapter is available in:

	SUPER::ES$REVIEW:[RA0293]RA0293_CHAP_2_COMMANDS.PS

    Much of what I'm querying below I missed first time around.
    I apologise for those oversights.
    
    Page 1-6: 
    The $ prompt is best described as the default system prompt these days.
    However it's described, the	system follows it with a space - missing
    from this example.
    
    Page 1-7a: 
    Qualifier - There may or may not be spaces before and after the
                "/" character.
    
    Page 1-7:
    Parameter - Parameter values might be amongst those listed
    		but not necessarily. The HELP command is one
    		example where a parameter isn't a file spec,
    		queue name or logical name.
    
    Page 1-9:
    Bullet 6 -  The system prompts you with an underscore followed
    		by the prompt... I know this is stated elsewhere
    		but the students should have the correct form.
    
    		$ SHOW -
    		_$ USERS
    
    		My_Prompt> SHOW -
    		_My_Prompt> USERS
    
    Bullet 8 -	...first four characters. Later Table 1-3 states
    		four or fewer. Do these need tying up more consistently?
    
    Page 1-14a:
    Typo on final line - chanaging -> changing
    
    Page 1-18:
    3. The recall buffer, when displayed, indents integers less than 10:
    
    $ RECALL/ALL
     1 SHOW TIME
     2 SNOW DEFAULT
    
    Page 1-19a;
    The idea of a type-ahead buffer should be mentioned on this page
    prior to announcing it at the foot of Table 1-9.
    
    Page 1-20:
    Not sure I like the first line of this page:
    "The VMS operating system issues messages in response to many of the
    commands you enter at your terminal".
    
    When I type commands correctly I receive very few MESSAGES but I
    get quite a lot of OUTPUT.
    
    The message from the THINK command could look like this these days:
    
    %DCL-W-IVKEYW, unrecognized keyword - check validity and spelling
     \THINK\
    
    Yes! I got this spawning a subprocess with an invalid command!
    
    Interactively it looks like this:
    
    %DCL-W-IVVERB, unrecognized command verb - check validity and spelling
     \THINK\
    
    I-n-t-e-r-e-s-t-i-n-g. . .
    
    Page 1-21:
    last line: check validity and spelling.
    
    How about a two level message?
    
    $ TYPE F.DAT
    %TYPE-W-SEARCHFAIL, error searching for DISK$USER:[SMITH]F.DAT;
    -RMS-E-FNF, file not found
    
    That's all folks

    Don't worry about this problem (see .4)
    
    %DCL-W-IVKEYW, unrecognized keyword - check validity and spelling
     \THINK\
    
    I think I had something more than THINK as the parameter to the
    command SPAWN. I couldn't reproduce the problem when I repeated it!

>>I think I had something more than THINK as the parameter to the
>>command SPAWN. I couldn't reproduce the problem when I repeated it!

	I couldn't reproduce it either.

However, I noticed that the text in the sample message in figure 2
is not complete.  It just says "check spelling".  We could change that
to "check validity and spelling", but it won't fit nicely on the page
without being shrunk quite a bit.  Or we could change it to "check
validity" and tell students that it was truncated in order to fit.
What do you think?

I incorporated all of your suggestions into this chapter except the 
last one about two-level error messages.  There are examples of these
elsewhere.  See chapter 5, pages 23 and 32 for starters.

Thanks for your help!

	Kristin

    Kristin,
    
    Thanks for the feedback.
    
    Yes, I looked at the space and wondered what it would look like.
    Does this fit more easily? The output is a little shorter:
    
    $ SHOW IT
    %DCL-W-IVKEYW, unrecognized keyword - check validity and spelling
     \IT\
    
    Failing that just a note stating that, for aesthetic reasons, some of
    the text has been truncated. (Or a note on the Instructor page to point
    this out).
    
    A general point. The revised materials have a much better look and feel
    about them. Clearly the pilots did us all a good service!

Kristen,

In response to your request for suggestions in 10.6, when you entered:

>> However, I noticed that the text in the sample message in figure 2
>> is not complete.  It just says "check spelling".  We could change that
>> to "check validity and spelling", but it won't fit nicely on the page
>> without being shrunk quite a bit.  Or we could change it to "check
>> validity" and tell students that it was truncated in order to fit.
>> What do you think?

I vote for printing verbatem what the system returns as a response 
for a message.  The message one receives is "check validity and spelling"
and that is what the student guide should reflect.

WHY?  Because when an instructor is in front of a group of students,
they expect explicit examples.  "Not fitting nicely on the page" is
not a good reason for truncating.

We face this many times in front of a classroom.  Consider this:  When a
student see's something in "black and white" they consider it correct.
So to them the student guide is correct.  If an instructor says, "The
message you will actually receive what your terminal just displayed to 
you here in lab, the student guide was modified to make the statement 
look nice on the page."
....the student guide then looses credibility.  The student will doubt
the instructor, the student guide, and think that we have modified our
instructional system to display different messages.

An example to back this up is the "IF_THEN_ELSE" statement on the same
line...it does not work, yet we see this continuously in the student
guides.

As an alternative suggestion:  You were concerned with shrinking.  
If the text does not draw the attention that you believe it should
with the larger font, why not bold the text?  

I hope that you understand what I am trying to get across to you. I
have seen your work in the old U&C II course and was impressed with
the clear examples you had given.  Please consider this suggestion 
as a vote for exampling exactly what the system displays.  Hope this
    was not too late.
    
    
Regards,

Dee Sayers
    

>>I vote for printing verbatem what the system returns as a response 
>>for a message.  The message one receives is "check validity and spelling"
>>and that is what the student guide should reflect.

	I do, too.  The art has been revised with the correct message.

		K.