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.
Subject:Re: Look upon this, and despair! From:Arlen -dot- P -dot- Walker -at- jci -dot- com To:TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Tue, 25 Apr 2000 09:11:57 -0500
Yes, John, you missed the point. What I found troubling wasn't the
instructions on adding sound, it was the phrasing of "add sound *into* your
web page" that bothered me.
The words on the page are ill-chosen, the syntax is convoluted at best, or
just plain bad.
In other words, it's not the what, it's the how that bothered me.
(And to forestall any further travbel down the web/words road, everybody
please note I didn't say the web was *only* words. I said words were the
"mainstay." They are the chief support of communication on the web. This
doesn't mean they are the exclusive form, only that they form the vast
majority of web communication. I'm also not about to argue over what any
given company or companies see as the backbone of the web. To quote an
exchange between Abe Lincoln and a reporter:
AL: If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?
R: Five?
AL: Four. Calling a tail a leg don't make it one.
Just because some short-sighted companies don't see the words doesn't mean
they aren't there, nonetheless.)
I should have tumbled to the non-native idea, earlier. It's got an eastern
rhythm to it, looking at it in that perspective I'd have picked Ukrainian
or Russian as the probable source, but (as noted by someone else) I'd have
most likely been wrong on the region, while right on the idea it's foreign.
In that respect, it might be a "bad day."
I had no objection to the content itself; in fact I said it contained a lot
of useful web design information. I was simply disappointed (irritated,
annoyed) by the presentation of the material. It's hard to look at official
output from someone else that's riddled with the kind of writing you've
spent time and energy eradicating. Like I said, it kind of makes you wonder
why you bother, you know?
Have fun,
Arlen
Chief Managing Director In Charge, Department of Redundancy Department
DNRC 224
Arlen -dot- P -dot- Walker -at- JCI -dot- Com
----------------------------------------------
In God we trust; all others must provide data.
----------------------------------------------
Opinions expressed are mine and mine alone.
If JCI had an opinion on this, they'd hire someone else to deliver it.
