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: Alternative to typo? From:Milan Davidovic <milan -dot- lists -at- gmail -dot- com> To:Geoff Hart <ghart -at- videotron -dot- ca> Date:Fri, 27 Mar 2009 09:43:17 -0400
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 9:12 AM, Geoff Hart <ghart -at- videotron -dot- ca> wrote:
> Second, and no less important, "may" is unacceptably vague: if at all
> possible, make the SME tell you clearly and unequivocally when a typo
> will and will not cause this behavior, and clearly spell this out for
> the reader.
Let's say, for whatever reason, that you *can't* get an unequivocal
statement of when the typo will cause the behaviour. Would you still
avoid the "may" statement?
ComponentOne Doc-To-Help 2009 is your all-in-one authoring and publishing
solution. Author in Doc-To-Help's XML-based editor, Microsoft Word or
HTML and publish to the Web, Help systems or printed manuals. http://www.doctohelp.com
Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for individual
authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface. Write
once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and version control! http://www.helpandmanual.com/
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-