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.
> I'm working with Development on a very large set of design requirements.
> There are many requirements that describe the software ("RCP") either
> allowing or requiring an action by the user. There was some question as
> to whether "allow" would be understood as an optional action, as in:
> "The RCP shall allow the user to schlep the pekele," i.e., the user may
> choose to schlep the pekele but doesn't have to.
I'd flip it around, and say "The user can (or has the option to) use RCP to..." or "The user must use RCP to..." This is clear, and has the added bonus of showing who the actor is, and not anthropomorphizing software. (Software *hates* it when you do that.)
Just a thought.
Mike
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Create and publish documentation through multiple channels with Doc-To-Help. Choose your authoring formats and get any output you may need.
Try Doc-To-Help, now with MS SharePoint integration, free for 30-days.
