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: What Are the Main Problems You Have with MS Word?
Subject:RE: What Are the Main Problems You Have with MS Word? From:"Sean Brierley" <sbri -at- haestad -dot- com> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Thu, 30 May 2002 14:57:10 -0400
Well . . . if the recover feature prevented the damage, then it would be
a good thing, right? Instead, it is an acknowledgement that things are
defective for a large number of users such that a way to recover pieces
of damaged data is needed. I wonder if, instead of seatbelts, a body-bag
would be a better analogy?
;?)
And, FWIW, for the incident in question, autorecover failed to provide
any advantage over reverting to a previously saved copy. That is, data
was lost and autorecover failed to revive it.
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Soderstrom [mailto:scribbler1382 -at- yahoo -dot- com]
Well, I don't want to get into a semantic argument, my point was if the
recover feature wasn't there, people would be whining all over the place
that Microsoft sucks for not including it.
"Miller, Alan" <Alan -dot- Miller -at- prometric -dot- com> wrote in message news:156083 -at- techwr-l -dot- -dot- -dot-
I don't see the connection between the two analogies. It seems to me
that
Martin Page is making a point about after-the-fact correction of the
consequences of failures caused by faulty design. Meanwhile, Martin
Soderstrom seems to be likening it to a failure to include a design
feature
that would prevent problems in the first place. This is an excellent
example
of why not to argue by analogy (Argumentum ad analgesic :-{) ).
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Check out RoboDemo for tutorials! It makes creating full-motion software
demonstrations and other onscreen support materials easy and intuitive.
Need RoboHelp? Save $100 on RoboHelp Office in May with our mail-in rebate.
Go to http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l
Free copy of ARTS PDF Tools when you register for the PDF
Conference by May 15. Leading-Edge Practices for Enterprise
& Government, June 3-5, Bethesda,MD. www.PDFConference.com
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
