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:Re: Logon question From:"Susan W. Gallagher" <sgallagher -at- EXPERSOFT -dot- COM> Date:Wed, 6 Jan 1999 12:53:35 -0800
I don't usually contribute to threads about wording, but a few
comments in this thread caught my eye.
>...I always prefer to go with login and log in. It's more UNIXy,
>more standard...
Aaaaaack! Nonononono! Sorry, but the MS Manual of Style is right on
when it says, "An exception is when other terms are dictated by the
interface." The correct term is the one used by the interface.
The only time I'd consider using weasel words is in documenting
cross-platform applications where the various platforms use different
terms. Even then, most of the time the term would only show up in
installation instructions and the various systems install software
so differently you almost have to create separate installation guides,
or at least separate instruction sets.
>... Using "Log in" and "Log on" as
>verbs requiring the preposition like wired suggested is fine in some cases,
>but I'd consider it slang and would leave it out of documents that might
>ever target first-time users...
Using non-standard terminology to shield first-time users from
the brutality of official terminology usually causes more confusion
than it prevents. Novices need to learn the terminology eventually,
so you might as well teach them. Otherwise, poor new user sits there
and... "Hmmm. Book says sign on, screen says log on. What do I have
to do to *sign* on? I'm stuck!"
(Damn! There's that "call a spade a spade" concept again!) ;-)
And then there was:
>In the definition for "onto", The Concise Oxford Dictionary states that "on
>to" implies 'approaching' and "onto" implies contact. Consider, "We drove
>on to the beach.", and "We drove onto the beach." Only in the latter case
>had we arrived!
Okay, disclaimer first. I am not, nor have I ever claimed to be, a
grammar maven. That said...
In the example above, "drove" is the complete verb and the only argument
is whether to use one or two prepositions. However, "log" is not the
complete action here (as it might be elsewhere, as in "the system logs
the time and date of the entry"). The verb is "log on" and any preposition
that follows it should remain separate -- at least that's what my
instinct tells me. (Sorry, can't look it up in Chicago, my copy is at home.)
