Re: One (1) question about odd number notation

Subject: Re: One (1) question about odd number notation
From: Kris Olberg <kjolberg -at- IX -dot- NETCOM -dot- COM>
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 10:42:39 -0700

At 11:11 PM 9/6/96 +0100, you wrote:
>For example, the handbook reads something like, "Full-time, regular
>employees are granted three (3) personal days each year."

>What's up with that? I cannot think of any solid reason for that technique.
>Is there any reason I _should_ keep that system?

I don't know where the technique originated. My initial reaction to is bad.
Two is two. Three is three. It's redundant, requiring the reader to process
more information than necessary.

Don't use it unless you have an overriding reason. Right now, I can't think
of any.

Regards...Kris
--------------------------------
kjolberg -at- ix -dot- netcom -dot- com (preferred)
kjolberg -at- aol -dot- com
kolberg -at- actamed -dot- com
102031 -dot- 3556 -at- compuserve -dot- com
s -dot- othoudt -at- worldnet -dot- att -dot- net

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: Let us test
Next by Author: Re: Let us test
Previous by Thread: One (1) question about odd number notation
Next by Thread: Re: One (1) question about odd number notation


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads