active vs. passive voice

[Leonard C. Porrello]

I think you've taken me out of context. Just to clarify, I agree that
you need to put the important stuff first and never suggested anything
to the contrary. The thing I suggested putting second is of little
consequence. If the reader never gets around to reading it, oh well, no
big deal.

 

Leonard C. Porrello

SoleraTec LLC

www.soleratec.com

 

 

________________________________

From: Susan W Gallagher [mailto:susanwg at gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 2:55 PM
To: Leonard C. Porrello
Cc: techwr-l at lists.techwr-l.com
Subject: Re: active vs. passive voice

 

First, assuming that the reader will take the time to read a whole two
sentences is dangerously optimistic - it usually doesn't happen. I refer
you to this article by Mike Hughes, who cautions writers to put the
important stuff in the _first_three_words_ of a step, because sometimes
that's all the attention span you get.

http://www.uxmatters.com/MT/archives/000242.php

 

I was lucky enough to be scheduled in the second half of the session
when Mike first presented this research at the (1998 I think) annual STC
bash. He makes sense - read the article.

 

And second, conventional tech-writing wisdom says to stick with the
present tense for just the reasons that Fred gave and because it's
easier to read and process. All of the technical writing text books I've
ever seen, as well as the MMoS, say to use the present tense. This isn't
news.

 

Third - to get back to the discussion at hand - I have no problem with
using "appears" or "opens", or even "is displayed". Please just remember
this - unless you are writing about the mating rituals of certain
members of the animal kingdom, "displays" is a transitive verb, TYVM.
<g>

 

-Sue Gallagher

 


 

On 3/27/08, Leonard C. Porrello <Leonard.Porrello at soleratec.com> wrote: 

Good question. I was assuming the reader would read both sentences
before carrying out the directions... So, the event
that takes place after he clicks <New Entry> actually occurs in the
future...

 

From: Fred Ridder [mailto:docudoc at hotmail.com]

> (B) "1. Click <New Entry>. The New Entry window will appear."

Why introduce the future tense? I don't see that it adds any
meaning. In fact, it seems to dissociate the result from its
cause because it carries some implication that the appearance
of the window might not be immediate.

And it still doesn't address the objection of the people who
believe that the verb "appear" is somehow supernatural
because it is the opposite of "disappear".