RE: A little respect for "unvalidated"

Subject: RE: A little respect for "unvalidated"
From: "McLauchlan, Kevin" <Kevin -dot- McLauchlan -at- safenet-inc -dot- com>
To: Robert Lauriston <robert -at- lauriston -dot- com>, "techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 16:08:28 -0400



Robert Lauriston suggested:
>
> "If your device works perfectly, but your customers can't use it
> correctly ...": in other words, you tested the device to validate its
> usability and it failed, right?
>
> Why not just use the standard English "not validated" or "not
> yet validated"?

And, as in my industry, when there are some that we just don't bother to validate? Or rather, we don't go to the time (from several months, to more than a year) and considerable expense of submitting them to third-party labs that validate them against a government standard...?

They're still "validated" by Engineering Test group (formerly called... wait for it... Product Validation), and also by QA before they ship, but they might be an interim or niche version and thus not worth the trouble to get 'em certified as validated against the government standard.

"Validated and not validated HSMs are functionally identical and are designed and built to the same performance and security standards." I dunno. Sounds clunky to me.


The "not validated" could also become scan-error-inducing if it occurred at an inconvenient physical location on a page.

I wonder how many people would ever be confused by "un" in front of a word that they knew.

Is it that I only imagine "un" to be a standard, common English prefix, well-known for its meaning and its effect on any word it precedes?


- Kevin




The information contained in this electronic mail transmission
may be privileged and confidential, and therefore, protected
from disclosure. If you have received this communication in
error, please notify us immediately by replying to this
message and deleting it from your computer without copying
or disclosing it.


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Free Software Documentation Project Web Cast: Covers developing Table of
Contents, Context IDs, and Index, as well as Doc-To-Help
2009 tips, tricks, and best practices.
http://www.doctohelp.com/SuperPages/Webcasts/

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-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/archive%40web.techwr-l.com


To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.

Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:
http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l-chat


Follow-Ups:

References:
A little respect for "unvalidated": From: Dan Goldstein
RE: A little respect for "unvalidated": From: Combs, Richard
RE: A little respect for "unvalidated": From: Handy, David
RE: A little respect for "unvalidated": From: Dan Goldstein
Re: A little respect for "unvalidated": From: Robert Lauriston

Previous by Author: RE: A little respect for "unvalidated"
Next by Author: RE: A little respect for "unvalidated"
Previous by Thread: RE: A little respect for "unvalidated"
Next by Thread: Re: A little respect for "unvalidated"


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads