RE: would you?

Subject: RE: would you?
From: "Brady, Joy" <JBrady -at- alldata -dot- net>
To: TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>, "'Kevin Feeman'" <Kevin -dot- Feeman -at- micromass -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 10:40:33 -0500

> Kevin Feeman wrote:
> "In writing a manual, a colleague suggested using the word "unsaved" for
> talking about files that have not been saved. Is unsaved really a word. It
> seems a little funny to me. I looked it up, and the word is for being
'saved' as in Christianity."

"Unsaved" is seems better to me. It's concise, people really do use the
word in that way, and it works perfectly in its own context. Glory!

> ----------

Previous by Author: RE: Schedule, Cost, & Quality: Pick Two
Next by Author: RE: Retentive on Friday
Previous by Thread: would you?
Next by Thread: RE: would you?

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

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads