TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
I always thought backward versus backwards followed the same rule as toward
versus towards. When there is actual physical movement, you add the "s",
and when it is just in the figurative sense, it is without the "s". And if
you want to get really picky, unless you are denoting real motion, at least
in the case of toward versus towards, you should avoid toward(s) and just
use "to" (see the book Common Errors in English, among other style books).
Anyway, you often hear people "say" the "s" regardless, but I think that's
an oral English thing, and not written. As for whether it's really
necessary to even say backward(s), it's probably enough to say "compatible",
but backward compatible has become such a part of the lingo. If you're
stressing that it is specifically compatible with prior versions, it's
probably not wrong to include "backward", but perhaps not 100% necessary.
BTW, the Microsoft Manual of Style for Technical Publications stresses that
the backward should not take an "s".
Cheers,
Traci with her nose in the English usage books...
-----Original Message-----
From: Carnall, Jane <Jane -dot- Carnall -at- compaq -dot- com>
To: TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Wednesday, February 16, 2000 12:20 PM
Subject: backward compatible
|En avant!
|
|>The TinWoodman4 heart is fully backward compatible with the latest patch
|for TinWoodman3.<
|
|Should this be backwards compatible? (Or backwardly compatible?)
|
|I've been searching the net for backward compatible, backwards compatible,
|and backwardly compatible. The most common usage seems to be the first:
|backward compatible.
|
|Is it always acceptable simply to say that something is "backward
|compatible" with something else?
|
|Jane Carnall
|Technical Writer, Compaq, France
|Unless stated otherwise, these opinions are mine, and mine alone.
|
|
|^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|Sponsored by Weisner Associates Inc., Online Information Services
|Training & consulting for RoboHELP, Dreamweaver, HTML, and HTML-Based Help.
|More info at http://www.weisner.com/train/ or mailto:training -at- weisner -dot- com -dot-
|
|Your web site in 32 languages? Maybe not now, but sooner than you think.
|Contact ForeignExchange for the FREE paper, "3 steps to successful
|translation management" (http://www.fxtrans.com/3steps.html?tw).
|
|---
|You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: nickelltrad -at- autoroute -dot- net
|To unsubscribe send a blank email to
leave-techwr-l-28383T -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
|Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit
|http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
