RE: What passes, and what doesn't

["McLauchlan, Kevin" <Kevin -dot- McLauchlan -at- safenet-inc -dot- com>]

Well, I agree with Keith's observation "... and actually subverting things underneath."  That would be an unfortunate impression to convey, and a good enough reason to avoid the phrase. However, if I'd wanted to say "interoperability", I'd have just used that term and been done with it. In this case, they simply can be connected to the same machine - each for its own purposes, none depending on or making use of the other - and not tread on each others' electronic toes.  Rare would be the customer (like hen's teeth?) who would actually put all three together outside a test lab.

Or something like that.

________________________________
From: voxwoman [mailto:voxwoman -at- gmail -dot- com]
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 2:53 PM
To: Keith Hood
Cc: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com; McLauchlan, Kevin
Subject: Re: What passes, and what doesn't

Additionally "coexistence" does not automatically imply "interoperability"  - it just means that the things can exist without impinging on the other's functions; not that they actually work together. Plus, it makes me feel as if I've wandered into a Newage tchachkis store.
=Wendy

On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Keith Hood <klhra -at- yahoo -dot- com<mailto:klhra -at- yahoo -dot- com>> wrote:
No, I definitely would not, because to those readers of the correct generation, the phrase "peaceful coexistence" was seen as a coverup, a hypocritical way of referring to one side only pretending to be cooperative and actually subverting things underneath. That doesn't exactly produce the halo effect when applied to how devices are supposed to work together.


--- On Fri, 5/21/10, McLauchlan, Kevin <Kevin -dot- McLauchlan -at- safenet-inc -dot- com<mailto:Kevin -dot- McLauchlan -at- safenet-inc -dot- com>> wrote:

From: McLauchlan, Kevin <Kevin -dot- McLauchlan -at- safenet-inc -dot- com<mailto:Kevin -dot- McLauchlan -at- safenet-inc -dot- com>>
Subject: What passes, and what doesn't
To: "techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com<mailto:techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com<mailto:techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>>
Date: Friday, May 21, 2010, 11:41 AM


Would you use a sub-section title "Peaceful Coexistence"
to head up a paragraph alerting buyers of the latest
generation of a serious product that they can connect three
different peripheral devices simultaneously?

The point, in context, is that previous generations would
not have allowed that arrangement due to device/driver
conflicts, and some customers might have the earlier
versions of the product. Those who would actually WANT
that config would be a tiny percentage of all customers.

The point of the question is that, while it is accurate
and brief, the heading might appear to readers of
a certain age as a mild attempt at humo[u]r.

I run into this sort of thing more often than you
might think (unless you read more of my posts than
is strictly good for you). This one fell in my lap
today, and I thought I'd ask of the general TW
gang if it would pass muster in your situation.

Am I the only one who bites his tongue a lot while
writing serious manuals and Help for serious product?

Yours in Detente, Komrades,

 - Kevin


The information contained in this electronic mail transmission 
may be privileged and confidential, and therefore, protected 
from disclosure. If you have received this communication in 
error, please notify us immediately by replying to this 
message and deleting it from your computer without copying 
or disclosing it.


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Gain access to everything you need to create and publish documentation, 
manuals, and other information through multiple channels. Choose 
authoring (and import) as well as virtually any output you may need. 
http://www.doctohelp.com/


 - Use this space to communicate with TECHWR-L readers - 
   - Contact admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com for more information - 


---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- 

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/archive%40web.techwr-l.com


To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info. 

Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:
http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l-chat