TERMINOLOGY NOTE: Year 2000 aka Y2K

Subject: TERMINOLOGY NOTE: Year 2000 aka Y2K
From: Matthew Stern <MAStern -at- PLATSOFT -dot- COM>
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 08:29:16 -0700

I hate to ruin a new buzzword, but actually, the "year" in "year 2000"
shouldn't be capitalized.

The Chicago Manual shows "year" and other references to centuries and
decades in lowercase. (See 8.40 and 8.68 in the 13th edition.) This
makes sense because it is the number that identifies the year. Besides,
from a purely semantic standpoint, what would make the year 2000 any
different from any other year (besides having to get new checks)?

But I suppose now that the buzzword has been coined, it will be "Year
2000" from now on, just as "data" is now treated as singular. (Oops, I
better not get that discussion started again.)

============================================
Matthew Stern
Sr. Technical Writer
Platinum Software Corporation

E-mail: mastern -at- platsoft -dot- com
Web: http://members.aol.com/mastrn/

The opinions here are solely my own.
============================================

TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/ or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html


Previous by Author: Eliminating Need for Technical Support
Next by Author: Word Users' Online Forums
Previous by Thread: TERMINOLOGY NOTE: Year 2000 aka Y2K
Next by Thread: REVIEW: document management pgms


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


Sponsored Ads