RE: [Fwd: Re: Avoid the Semicolon in Tech Writing?]

[eric -dot- dunn -at- ca -dot- transport -dot- bombardier -dot- com]

"Anameier, Christine A - Eagan, MN" <christine -dot- a -dot- anameier -at- usps -dot- gov> wrote
on 08/18/2003 01:46:51 PM:

> Sure, some of the subtleties may be lost on *some*
> readers, but not all
> readers--and those who don't get the subtle nudges surely
> aren't going
> to stop and stare at the semicolon. I don't see how they
> can be both (a)
> ignorant of the meaning of punctuation and (b) fixated on
> the meaning of
> punctuation, to the point where they're derailed by an
> unfamiliar mark.

You've completely failed to convince me. You have even pushed me solidly
over into the ALWAYS avoid semi-colon territory. While all of this makes
for great theoretical discussion and allows many to show-off their more
arcane language skills, what does it really mean in the case of technical
documentation.

In the example given, what kind of self respecting documentation would use
such a construct? Flow charts, organigrams, tables, or bulleted lists will
get the reader to the information they need, when they need it. The
semicolon constructs seem suited to long-winded novel length descriptive
text. The average user does not want to infer the relationships. They want
to be told point blank what the relationships and functions are.

In other words, if the difference between the two sentences is important
enough to underline, you've failed your job because semicolon deficient
readers will miss the 'hidden' information. If the information is not
critical the semicolon construct is not required. So, to avoid having high
fallooting writers writing over the heads of some readers a ban on
semicolons may indeed be in order.

Eric L. Dunn
 Senior Technical Writer