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.
<snip>
Well, the problem is that it _is_ such a useful word... when the
meaning is truly "the manner in which something is implemented" or
"the act of implementing something". It's all the sloppy uses that
are the problem. </snip>
Regarding the "implementation" thread... I'm trying to limit the
use of implementation simply because it is being used in place
of "to do ___". When a two-page document has 20+ instances
of "implementation" when 2 would do, then I'm going to gird for
war (in a genteel and professional way, of course).
Thanks for all of the responses! The analysis of how the word
implementation applies to the DCOM standard is exactly what
I wanted to hear. In this case, I'm happy to leave implementation
in the sentence. However, it may get deleted elsewhere in the
document.
