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.
Subject:actor/object oriented are ugly From:"James M.Lockard" <norton -at- MCS -dot- NET> Date:Fri, 26 Jan 1996 07:49:03 -0600
Actor-oriented or object-oriented? Read them. Say them out loud. See what
I mean? Ugly.
Now try "active voice" and "passive voice". They sound better. Moreover,
they're good terms. Let's not replace good terms with
Writing in the active voice means that the verbs carry the meaning of the
sentence and the person or thing performing the action is clear. In the
passive voice, the nouns carry the meaning of the sentence and the person
or thing performing the action is muddied (or "obfuscated" as some would
have it). The active voice is clear, direct, and lively--active. The
passive voice is unclear, indirect, and phlegmatic. Which would you want
Although the passive voice can be useful at times, in general, it is
Sorry for the diatribe (SFTD ?)
norton -at- mcs -dot- net
"I meant what I said, and I said what I meant."
-- Horton the Elephant