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.
Subject:Re: help with terminology, pleeze From:"Michael West" <mbwest -at- bigpond -dot- com> To:techwr-l Date:Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:06:16 +1100
Wright, Lynne wrote:
> - When describing a tree structure, we don't want to use nodes and
> leaves to describe elements in our user guides, which are targetted
> towards average joes, not programmers. Are there standard colloquial
> replacements? ie. items and sub-items, or elements and sub-elements?
I've seen "nodes" and "branches" mostly. I think your material
will be better if you focus on the content rather than the form.
"Click the plus sign to expand the list of XYZs", for example.
Try to talk about the real stuff rather than the screen artifact.
It's a bit like saying "Read this story" instead of "Read the ink
on these pages."
> - Split windows are divided into panes. Fine. But in a single window,
> would you still call the white rectangular area used to display
> information a pane?
> Or is there another term that's better: ie.
> 'display area'?
That'll do, but is it really essential to mention it?
They should be looking at what is *in* the window.
In real life, do you say "Look at the window glass" or
"Look -- it's raining outside" ?
> - 'Amphenol'... is it supposed to have an initial cap all the time,
> or is 'amphenol' ok?