Re: "dummy" books to...

Subject: Re: "dummy" books to...
From: Mike Pope <mikep -at- ASYMETRIX -dot- COM>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 1994 09:13:00 PST

Well, our style is that a new term has to be defined right where it first
appears. We don't happen to use marginalia for that, but that seems
reasonable. Then every term so defined also appears in the glossary at the
end. My feeling is that the definition tends to be more meaningful in
context, but if you're far from the original definition when you encounter a
strange term, the glossary'll do ya.

-- Mike Pope
Asymetrix Corporation
mikep -at- asymetrix -dot- com
>To: Multiple recipients of list TECHWR-L
>Subject: Re: "dummy" books to...
>Date: Monday, March 28, 1994 3:57PM

>I love the idea of margin definitions. Few things are as frustrating as
>finding an unfamiliar word (or a familiar word used differently) in the
>stopping what you're reading, going to the glossary, and looking up the
>when what you really want is an answer to your question! And then if it's
>not even there... (which begs a different question -- how do you decide
>needs to be defined?). I thnks having the definitions in the margin,
>indicated with bold text in the index, and no glossary would be more
>intuitive than the current system. Anyone want to poke holes in this?

>Bonni Graham
>Manual Labour
>President, SDSTC
>BonniG -at- aol -dot- com

Previous by Author: Re: Is Hypertext More Productive?
Next by Author: Re: marginal :-) definit...
Previous by Thread: Re: "dummy" books to...
Next by Thread: Re: "dummy" books to...

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

Sponsored Ads