Re: punctuation and procedure titles...

Subject: Re: punctuation and procedure titles...
From: Dick Margulis <margulis -at- fiam -dot- net>
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 06:12:12 -0500

First rule: pick one and stay with it. This is the one that nearly
everyone can agree with.

Second rule (eloquently expressed by Mark Baker a year or so ago): avoid
double marking. As you have already set off the instruction list
typographically (paragraph break, numbers, possibly indentation or
vertical space), you do not need the further decoration of a colon. If
you were writing the instructions as a solid paragraph (look at the back
of a Publishers Clearing House entry form for an example), you would
need the colon. In your layout, though, it is not _needed_ (although it
isn't hurting much).

Nonetheless, the first rule still applies.


PS: I doubt the two people you asked were actually "grammarians" For an
interesting history lesson, look up the word.

Angela Pollak wrote:
> Do you punctuate procedural titles with a colon? For example, which of the
> following would you say is correct:
> To <fry an egg>:
> 1. blah blah.
> 2. blah blah blah.
> To <fry an egg>
> 1. blah blah.
> 2. blah blah blah.
> And what is your reasoning?

Previous by Author: RE: a vs. an
Next by Author: Re: a vs. an
Previous by Thread: punctuation and procedure titles...
Next by Thread: RE: punctuation and procedure titles...

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

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads