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.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wanda
> Sent: February-03-12 1:25 PM
> To: Techwr-l
> Subject: Re: WRONG!..... -ish?
>
> I can't believe that's it's Friday already. Whew.
>
> So I can get my two pennies in before the week ends. Yes, sentence one
> is grammatically correct. Yes, context will indicate whether one would
> recommend or warn/caution and that would affect the structure of the
> statement. And, like Suzanne, I am accustomed to structuring the
> information differently. I'm accustomed to tagging the information as a
> note/caution/warning with formatting to call it out. I'm also used to
> providing the action and issue (removing the cover causes this
> particular problem), recommended action (don't do it), and recovery
> actions in case you didn't heed my hand waving. It may result in more
> text, but it provides the information the user needs to avoid a problem
> and recover from the problem if they are reading this information too
> late in the process. [...]
In this case, I don't have a lot of room (or desire) to insert a NOTE,
especially not the way we/I format those (with a color change and an
icon and a surrounding box to make them stand out).
The mention of the wee protective (deflective?) covers is in
a table containing the one-liner summaries of the callouts
below a view of the appliance back panel. The other sentence in
that table cell said. "... not used in this application."
People wonder why I start threads with lo-o-o-o-o-ong posts.
It's because my short ones all end up needing an excess of
post-facto explanation anyway. :-)
-k
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.