Re: "Type" vs. "Enter" (take II)

Subject: Re: "Type" vs. "Enter" (take II)
From: "Ned Bedinger" <doc -at- edwordsmith -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:43:00 -0700

----- Original Message -----
From: "TechComm Dood" <techcommdood -at- gmail -dot- com>

> involved. I ran this by several localizers and every single one of
> them agreed that "via" as well as "e.g.", "i.e.", "etc." and any other
> English adoption of latin phraseology should be avoided, as should any
> other form of colloquialism, slang, or loose metaphor.

> Time to think globally, folks.


This is the sort of ad hoc rulemaking that makes the Microsoft styleguide
such a liability for tech writers.
The costs and considerations for localizing documentation are emphatically
NOT a driver everywhere.

Ned Bedinger
Ed Wordsmith Technical Commuications


ROBOHELP X5: Featuring Word 2003 support, Content Management, Multi-Author
support, PDF and XML support and much more!

WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT: New! Document review system for Word and FrameMaker
authors. Automatic browser-based drafts with unlimited reviewers. Full
online discussions -- no Web server needed!

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.


"Type" vs. "Enter" (take II): From: Geoff Hart
Re: "Type" vs. "Enter" (take II): From: TechComm Dood

Previous by Author: Re: "Type" vs. "Enter"
Next by Author: Re: "Type" vs. "Enter"
Previous by Thread: Re: "Type" vs. "Enter" (take III)
Next by Thread: Re: "Type" vs. "Enter" (take II)

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

Sponsored Ads