Who has to?
We have to look at what any Tutorial is all about.
What is the basis of this detail for the behaviour of novice tutorial writers? Is it a useful generalization?
A novice tutorial writer would usually spend tons of time studying the subject, then trying to accomplish the task (like running xp.vhd from USB), then explain it to others in a brief step-by-step Guide.
Are you taking your own ideas of "how you do it" or "how you would do it" and projecting them onto others as though such behaviour is universal? Or is this a generalization based on your observations in these forums?
To make it shorter, the explanations are often omitted, making it for a reader impossible to understand.
Why do you believe that you know that an experienced tutorial writer would learn this?
With experience a Tutorial writer would gradually learn that to be understood the material must be presented not only in sequential, but also LOGICAL for a reader manner.
Instead of typing about a "professional knowledge sharing document", would it be useful for you to insert yourself into the discussion and type something like, "this is how a tutorial would go that I'd enjoy reading"? I find your manner of typing your opinions as being disconnected from yourself to result in my wanting to ask, "Says who?" If you used quantifiers such as "some," even that would help to alleviate the impression that you are unjustified in your generalizations. Without knowing your qualifications, it is difficult for me to accept some of what you post.
This presumes, that not only HOW, but also brief WHY & WHAT HAPPEN should be incorporated, thus making it a professional knowledge sharing document targeting less prepared audience than the writer.
How about "It's simply a more efficient way for me (and perhaps others, too!) to learn"?
It's simply more efficient way to learn.
How do you know this? If you are typing from your own experiences, why not include that fact; change "unskilled novice" to a subject you are qualified to type about... Or share your qualifications!
Otherwise any unskilled novice would be forced to sift through the tons of crap on many forums that usually accompany small grains of gold,
I don't appreciate this use of most. Do you know most unskilled novices? Do you know many? Do you know any?
and most aren't qualified to filter that gold.
"Crows are black." Ok, obviously this is your opinion. I might even agree. But given the previous material's authoritarian tone (connected to "afar" rather than to you), I find that my conditioning causes me to resent the above statement as being further, unwarranted proclamations.
This task is for a teacher.
Could you please refer me to a post where you've introduced yourself as being intimate with both unskilled computer novices as well as "the whole pro education" system?
The approach isn't new, the whole pro education is based on it.
Who are you hoping to influence with this post, exactly? Everyone? Do you have some measurable changes you'd like to observe as a result of what you've offered?
What's new for each novice writer - to look at it a professional way.
Now, a Tutorial can still be made short by presenting material artfully, as its done in pro documents like college books. Just by using various format and other features. But it won't suffer from appearing incomplete and illogical to a reader. Of course, skills "prerequisites" always apply in college courses, but on the forums its not structured that well, so "default" skill level is always presumed, unless other Tutorials (or good developer presentations) are referenced bringing a reader to required skills level.
That's nice of you to say so.
...I'm not frustrated at all. The post you quoted was a "comment on comment" about one of the methods used here, where its author on another forum explained the details eventually but a bit late. yyyy did excellent job,
And you know this because... You study the subject very often? You've produced some professional works, yourself?
and actually gradually incorporated some explanations in her Tutorial, and some in post comments. It does require skills and time to make something look like a professional work.
Important is, she accomplished interesting goal and shared it with others the best she can.
Which readers are you thinking of, in particular? Are you suggesting that these concepts were complex as feedback to yyyy? If so, who is that feedback on behalf of?
There are more complex concepts she used in step 3, 4 and other that require extra study from a reader.
How do you know this? Are you gathering the pattern that you demonstrate and which has led to this response of mine?
Representing a 3-d party method in a 1-sentence summary is a challenge mastered only by practice.
Or we can type posts which generalize with apparent expertise on various subjects, including collaboration, education, what is included in the meaning of "professional", etc.
Each of these methods in turn requires extra knowledge, and she used many, showing impressive skills. A list of methods used with some links would help.
See, all comments in this thread are left, because ppl like the idea and appreciate the effort. Everyone wanted to help, not express frustration. This is a cumulative method, a result of many ppl work. I look through it thinking how skilled one must be to run around traps left my MS. Now, about jumping in, each author wants to preserve the form of their presentation that reflects their personality. We can only suggest, unless its an open Wiki style article.
I'd enjoy some of your posts more, if they were typed as though from your own, valuable self.