I would be interested as well. However, I disagree slightly with ssgbryan.  I develop curricula for higher education and over the decades I have found, or as we say online, IMHO, the combination of written and video lessons work best. 

Case in point:  I have difficulty retaining anything read from the computer screen.  I am also a physical learner.  If I have the printed document beside me and the video available in another window, I can read the directions and instructions while the video is a hands-on tutorial which should supplement the written by showing, step by step, following the written, exactly how something is done, leaving out no steps.

One of the things we had discovered in higher education is that there is a profound truth to the old saying "never let the engineers write the users guide."  The engineers already know what is to happen and will automatically take short cuts, leaving the learner behind.

While I am a Composition and Literature professor, the processes are the same.  I refer to the process as "destructive testing."  You need to be able to teach someone with preconceived ideas of a process the correct way, without too much thrash and burn time, for the training to be effective.  Let a group of end users with minimal knowledge but an interest in the process have the material at several developmental stages...and see what blows up.

Primary, secondary, and tertiary testing.  Around here they call it Beta Testing.  Microsoft calls it "let the buyer figure it out and we'll use their own work-arounds to fix it next release."

I wish you great success in your project and would be willing to take a look at the development steps if you decide to go to beta testing and beyond.

Cedarwolf