Re. Warnings... brief clarification

Subject: Re. Warnings... brief clarification
From: Geoff Hart <geoff-h -at- MTL -dot- FERIC -dot- CA>
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 1996 10:52:18 LCL

Nora Merhar pointed out a significant problem in my
previous posting, which suggested that you could call all
advisory notices "notes", since readers will determine the
significance of the note by themselves. Context is
everything, and I regrettably forgot to include context!

To clarify, my original "way back when" posting in this
thread recommended that you use the appropriate warning
symbols, and that in this case, adding a title "warning"
would be redundant. Thus, if the skull and crossbones icon
indicates risk to life or limb, and the first words
following the icon are "to avoid electrocution...", then it
won't matter whether you use "note" or "warning" to preface
the warning text... readers should get the point.

--Geoff Hart @8^{)}
geoff-h -at- mtl -dot- feric -dot- ca

Disclaimer: If I didn't commit it in print in one of our
reports, it don't represent FERIC's opinion.

Previous by Author: Re. "Darn lawyers"?
Next by Author: Re. Certification anecdote
Previous by Thread: Re: Re[2]: Re. "Darn lawyers"?
Next by Thread: Re: Ethics of Helping with Student Paper

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

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads