Re: Retentive on Friday

Subject: Re: Retentive on Friday
From: "Dan Roberts" <droberts63 -at- earthlink -dot- net>
To: "Brierley, Sean" <Sean -at- Quodata -dot- Com>, "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 19:57:08 -0500

Sean listed some perfectly good techniques and tendencies, including ....

>I use click, instead of click on.
well, there has been an interesting debate on winhelp-l about 'click' vs
'choose' and I think I vote for 'choose' even tho we all 'click'
>I use commas before which.

well, of course you do. who wouldn't use them to set off ....what is that
thing called, a non-restrictive clause?
>Each heading is followed by an introduction (maybe brief) before launching
into any procedure.
debatable, depending on how much information is duplicated from an
introductory topic vs how much info is pertinant to the procedure only.
>I strive mightily to fit new information to my existing document styles,
>rather than creating new document styles to accommodate new information.

information is information, and the type of information it is doesn't really
vary a lot. Why re-invent the wheel?

>There are varying degrees to this, I admit. What happened? Is what happened
>bad? Should I have such structured thoughts about how my technical
>should be written? Do we all end up down that path . . . or am I an

I'd say you've discovered quick'n'easy tricks that help you to churn out
reams of perfectly good text.
Bad? Nope.
Should you? Sure, unless someone has a better way, or it conflicts with
corporate style in some way.
Probably. Probably not (unless you worry whether none's have periods - ne'er
mind - you hadda be there)

Previous by Author: RE: Tech Comm Portfolio
Next by Author: Re: he/she thread
Previous by Thread: Re: Retentive on Friday
Next by Thread: Interview and Database Software

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

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads