Real documentation does not always divide cleanly into four isolated forms. A how-to guide may need a short explanation before the user can safely complete a task. A reference page may need a sentence explaining why a setting matters. A tutorial may need to link to detailed reference material. Removing every crossover can make the documentation less useful, not more correct.
So the four types are a decision framework, not a compliance system. They exist to answer one question, what is this page for, and to catch a page that has quietly become three pages at once. They are not a labelling scheme to be enforced.
| Rule | What it means in practice |
|---|---|
| Documentation serves four distinct user needs | The four types exist because the needs do, not because a taxonomy is tidy. |
| Each type requires a different approach | A tutorial and a reference page are written, reviewed and maintained differently. Treating them the same is how both end up mediocre. |
| Each document has one clear primary purpose | If a page has two, it is two pages. |
| The types are a course-correction tool | Use them to ask what a page is for, not to label it once and move on. |
| A tutorial is defined by the teaching relationship | Not by the reader being a beginner. |
| A how-to guide may carry a short explanation | When it is needed to complete the step or avoid a mistake. Stripping it out serves the category, not the reader. |
The practical rule is simple: each document should have one primary job, while limited supporting material can remain when it helps that document do it.
Three things follow from this that a page taxonomy on its own does not reach, and the method covers all three: how to split, merge, deduplicate, version and retire pages across a library that already exists; a verification standard that separates what has been tested from what has only been asserted; and how to assess a request before agreeing to write anything.
Deciding what a page should be is the easy half. The other half is what to do with the 400+ articles already in the library, and that is where most of this method lives.
When categorical purity and user usefulness conflict, user usefulness wins.
