Re: Warnings and Cautions

Subject: Re: Warnings and Cautions
From: Howard Rauch <techxfr -at- LAKEFIELD -dot- NET>
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 00:51:39 -0700

Robert Plamondon wrote:
> Using "warning" to mean "danger" strikes me as being a warningous
> procedure. It just doesn't evoke the right reaction. If the
> procedure presents the user with danger, it should say DANGER.
> If you do a man-on-the-street survey, I'll bet that most would
> consider "caution" to be a higher level of threat than "warning,"
> and that "danger" would be the only one of the three that was
> consistently associated with risk of life and limb.
Whether you are right or wrong, the folks who developed ANSI Z535 don't
agree with your position. That document establishes caution as the
lowest level of threat and danger as the highest. Regardless of what the
man on the street might think or say, if I'm being deposed in liability
litigation, I would want a reliable standard to support my actions.

Howard Rauch>

Technology Transfer, Inc.
"Linking Creators and Users of Technology"
933 North 18th St, Manitowoc WI 54220-3132
Voice: 920-682-1528 Fax: 920-686-0898

TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
Search the archives at or search and
browse the archives at

Previous by Author: Re: use of he/she/they
Next by Author: Software Application
Previous by Thread: Re: Warnings and Cautions
Next by Thread: cautions and warnings

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

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads