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:3D or 3-D? From:Emily Cotlier <Cotlier -at- JBLSMTP -dot- PHL -dot- LRPUB -dot- COM> Date:Fri, 10 Oct 1997 16:27:30 -0500
I'm a medical editor interested in techincal writing. Right now, I'm trying to
find the correct way to copy-edit the term "three-dimensional" in a
medical paper. This paper describes the medical uses of two different
ultrasound technologies, one producing two-dimensional images, and
one, of course, that creates three-dimensional images.
The author has these terms abbreviated as "2D" and "3D", and written in
full as "2-Dimensional" and "3-Dimensional". Is this correct? If not, what
do the readers of this list recommend to refer to a current technology? I
feel that the abbreviation may be OK, but I am dubious about the full
terms, especially with that inappropriate capitalization used constantly.
None of my available style guides (all medical, of course) have anything
about this term.
I appreciate any replies or thoughts! Please reply in private if desired to
cotlier -at- phl -dot- lrpub -dot- com