RE: Year 2000 manual introduction

Subject: RE: Year 2000 manual introduction
From: "Halter, Meg" <HalterMC -at- navair -dot- navy -dot- mil>
To: "'TECHWR-L'" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2000 11:46:07 -0800

Hi Lindsay --

It seems to me that it's more important to include a list of the equivalent
terms across the set of manuals. This is going to be the source of
confusion, not style. If your group has the time, it would be worthwhile to
add cross references between the variant terms in the indexes for each to of
the manuals. Easier said than done!

Just a thought.

-- Meg

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Doyle, Lindsay [SMTP:lindsay -dot- doyle -at- funb -dot- com]
>
> I want to explain to the readers that there are both terminology variances
> as well as tense changes (sometimes present, sometimes past). As there
> are almost 50 individual manuals (one for each group that tested and one
> global guide), some of them
> in excess of 600 pages, and since the information in each came from as
> many as 6 different sources (NT, UNIX, etc.), it is not feasible for me to
> reviseeach manual so that the terminology and tense are uniform
> throughout.
>




Previous by Author: Translation with minor tables & flow charts
Next by Author: RE: hyperlinks in printed documents
Previous by Thread: RE: Year 2000 manual introduction
Next by Thread: TANGENT: What do they do now?


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads