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.
Re: joking, no? : Using Contractions in Software Manuals
Subject:Re: joking, no? : Using Contractions in Software Manuals From:John Posada <jposada01 -at- YAHOO -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 11 May 1999 10:50:14 -0700
Maybe I did miss the humor in the "would of" post. The
last couple of day, "the bear has been eating me".
However, that doesn't negate my stance that
contractions have no place in technical documentation.
Let's say that you use contractions and out of 100
people, 5 of them, for whatever reason, have a problem
from a language or technical accuracy standpoint.
OTOH, if you do not use them, 5 people have a problem
from a formal/familiar standpoint. Would I rather come
off as too stuffy or technically inaccurate?
--- Mary Choy <mchoy -at- SIRIUS -dot- COM> wrote:
> Y'all,
>
> I think original writer was joking. True, no smiley
> emoticon, but I think she's
> joking. As in: we'd ALL prefer to see "would've" to
> "would of" because "would
> of" is flat-out poor and inaccurate grammer.
>
> Cheers,
> /Mare
===
John Posada
Western Union International
(w) jposada -at- westernunion -dot- com
(p) john -at- tdandw -dot- com
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com
