Commentary How two strategies far visually managing text emerged simultaneously but separately. Two Approaches to Modularity: Comparing the STOP Approach with Structured Writing Robert E. Horn, Visiting Scholar Program on People, Computers, and Design Center for the Study of Language and Information Stanford University 2819 Jackson St. # 101 San Francisco, CA 94115 bobhorn@well.com Chairman Information Mapping, Inc. 411 Waverly Road Waltham, MA 02452-8470 Background The first time I heard of the STOPpaper was sometime in the mid 1980s when the historian of technical writing, John Brockmann, phoned me to ask if my Information Mapping method of structured writ. ing derived from the STOP method. At the time I told Brockmann that there was no direct relationship between our two approaches since I'd never read the paper. When the editor of this journal sent me the STOP document in preparation for writing this paper, I read it with delight. Although our two innovations date from the same period, the STOP authors and I were working in two completely different disciplines, cukures, organizations, and locations. These two approaches resulted in modularityalbeit of quite different kinds. The main purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast these two approaches
/lp/association-for-computing-machinery/two-approaches-to-modularity-comparing-the-stop-approach-with-IIqehXq0Cv