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.
On 14 July (happy Bastille Day, documenteurs et documenteuses) Caryn
Rizell wrote about standards, noting that, while different standards
exist, we should agree upon some.
Well, asking us to agree on anything (and STAY in agreement) doesn't
sound too realistic. Besides which, there are good reasons for the
standards to be different.
What I would like to see (and I'm hoping others will agree (but see
above)) is a table (and it would be large, so maybe a series of
tables) listing variant standards (oxymorons are our way of life), a
citation to authority, definition and the general type of *audience*
for which that is a standard. That is,
kb TI Manual xxx kilobit Programmers
kB TI Manual xxx kilobyte Programmers
K SI 1000 metric
K JEDEC Std 100 1024 computer industry
We'd have to have separate tables for abbreviations, for spelling, for
punctuation, and so on.
Would this be more helpful? At least you may then know when you're
following your audience's expectations, and be tipped off as to when
Doug Montalbano <> Technical Writer <> Chiron Corporation
Doug_Montalbano -at- cc -dot- chiron -dot- com <> (510) 601-2862 (voice/TDD)
If anybody wanted to tell me something, they'd have to write it
on a piece of paper and shove it over to me. They'd get bored
as hell doing that after a while, and then I'd be through with
having conversations for the rest of my life.
_The Catcher in the Rye_