Re: standards

[Steve Fouts <sfouts -at- ELLISON -dot- SC -dot- TI -dot- COM>]

From: Caryn Rizell

|}
|} I have been reading with interest the recent discussions about
|} how to do certain things (an SQL vs a SQL, shut down vs shutdown, etc).
|}
|} I can't help wondering why we can't agree on a standard and
|} use it.  Maybe all of us won't agree, but if most of us
|} agree (given that the standard is grammatically sound), why
|} not adopt it?  Then we wouldn't have to spend the time
|} to rehash this stuff again and again.
|}
|} I think the discussions are useful, but we should reach
|} a decision and stick with it as a group (all techncial
|} communicators).

Way back in the 4Q90 issue of the STC Journal, a guy by the name of
Ric Shockley proposed that the Society publish a ``standard'' of this
sort. His letter was entitled, ``If Not STC, Then Who?.'' I wrote a
fairly long winded reply to him (I can just *feel* the waves of shock
and disbelief!) that was published in the 3Q91. The basic gist of it
was that we each have a responsibility to communicate with our
audience. If our audience expects things to look a certain way, we
better deliver the goods, standard or no.

When we get some new terminology here, we first try to ascertain
whether or not there is a de facto industry standard. If no, we say,
``pick one, and be consistent!'' So perhaps the standard of this
list should be, ``Make an informed choice, and be consistent.''

The best way I can think of for making an informed choice is to discuss
it for a while with your peers. Warm fuzzies for everyone! Now, get
back to work!
    _______________   _____
   /  ___  __/__\  \ /  / _\    Steve Fouts
  /___ \|  |  ___\  |  /  __\   sfouts -at- ellison -dot- sc -dot- ti -dot- com
 /   /  \  |      \   /      \
/_______/__|_______\_/________\ "She understood, as he did, that all writing
was infernally boring and futile, but that it had to be done out of respect
for tradition"                  --Stanislaw Lem