Proposed, New Analog Devices Data Sheets

A few points:
-How about the terminology section, will it no longer appear or up to each originator?
-Switching from double column to single column is a big change (at leat for legacy ADI). Not sure it improves readability
-Showing row separators help
-Application diagram in the front page is good, but the mockup is missing a FBD. This should be a must

In ADI, it's my understanding that the creation of a datasheet is entirely up to the application engineer in charge of the product. This in itself is correct. But, because the contents and text are left entirely up to the application engineer, there are variations in the way the specifications are published, even though there should be common specifications for the same type of product (e.g., OpAmp and ADCs).

Some specifications that are particularly important to customers are not written or explained sufficiently, while others are written in an easy-to-understand manner from the customer's point of view for the same product. In other words, there is variation.

According to my research (regarding handing of input overvoltage), TI's datasheet seems to be consistent in this point. I think common specifications in the same product category should be written in a consistent manner, not left to application engineers. By improving the accuracy of the datasheet in this way, I think we can reduce the number of similar questions posted on EngineerZone, and application engineers can spend more time on more productive and creative work!

This is the content of my presentation at the recent ADI Ignite APAC 3Q General Assembly.

PLEASE don't use that font.  Seriously.  It isn't unreadable, but it's close.  The aspect ratio of the characters is completely unacceptable for legibility -- they are far too tall, given the character width and spacing.  Your data sheets have taken a step backwards in readability with this new style sheet, to the point where opening a data sheet for a newly-introduced part is an exercise in suspense.  Key point here is that there was little or nothing wrong with the old format. 
Some of the other suggestions people have offered are useful, but none of them should be implemented at the expense of text legibility.

I would like to have the Specifications in Bold on the first page (at least the primary spec's). Furthermore, when doing specifications for multiple parts, keep it consistent. In the example datasheet, the MAX22566 supply current lists side B supply current first where all the other variants show side A supply current first. Agree with the package and pin-out being on the first pages but I do like the simplified Application Diagram on the first page. 

Looks good, a few comments below:

• Except for the first page, the DS is in 1 column layout, I think that is an improvement but also a big change , will this be applied to the LT parts as well?
• Will we still use the "Draft" watermark for preliminary releases? IMO this is misleading for customers(i.e. document not ready), could we use "Preliminary" or something similar
• Specifications table sections headings are the same fonts as the first row, might look better if it was slightly smaller
• Not sure about the Safety Regulatory Approvals table format, looks condensed
• Pin description table: The description column width is too small, that has been an issue, I understand there are 4 generics in the example but would it be possible to split the tables? That would improve the description visibility and give a better chance to squeeze all the pins on 1 page for a given part
• The package outlines seems to be a screenshot, I assume this is cleaned up in the final version
• Really like the ordering guide and selector Guide format/graphics, not sure if the "Selector Guide" title is appropriate though (Maybe use "Part selector Guide"?)

Regards,

Wassim

Agree -

block diagram is sacrosanct.

If there are variants of a part PLEASE put the comparison on the FRONT sheet in a table. If there a lot of variants then out that at the end of the DS but still summarise on front sheet and LINK the full info with hyperlink to sheet later on.  L-ADI DS are really time consuming on this aspect.

yes indeed but make it bigger

Front page - Apps Diag is a good addition but make it bigger - see LTC datasheets.  Top half highlights of part, (with smaller arrows!), bottom half  Apps diagram.  FAE / eng can INSTANTLY see what this part is about.

Larger font is a plus for readability at least in theory but narrow charecter spacing and also tight line spacing gives it a crowded feel which negates the effect.

Plus points for the app diagram right on the front page.

Hi, all said from the colleagues below. I'd like to see the "Typical Applications" chapter at the end of the datasheet, like we had it in the LT datasheets.