Re: Coax/Twinax vs. Coaxial/Twinaxial

Subject: Re: Coax/Twinax vs. Coaxial/Twinaxial
From: dski -at- CAMEONET -dot- CAMEO -dot- COM -dot- TW
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 1996 13:40:16 GMT

> When is it appropriate to use the short form (coax, twinax) versus the
> long form (coaxial, twinaxial)? I've seen them both ways, even in the
> same bullted list.

> To connect a 3600 printer directly to an IBM mainframe, you need:
> o a coax adapter card.
> o a coaxial cable equivalent to IBM part number #######.

"Coax" is a noun meaning "coaxial cable." It's informal, but acceptable
for most audiences, though it certainly should be explained. "Coaxial"
is an adjective. Since few adapters are made of concentric conductors,
"coax adapter" makes more sense than "coaxial adapter."

Dan Strychalski dski -at- cameonet -dot- cameo -dot- com -dot- tw Man without a mouse

TECHWR-L List Information
To send a message about technical communication to 2500+ list readers,
E-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send administrative commands
ALL other questions or problems concerning the list
should go to the listowner, Eric Ray, at ejray -at- ionet -dot- net -dot-

Previous by Author: Re: on vs in
Next by Author: Re: White Papers
Previous by Thread: Re: Coax/Twinax vs. Coaxial/Twinaxial
Next by Thread: Layout & Design Books (was Re: Spacing, Convention, and Layout in General)

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

Sponsored Ads