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[2]: Comma, comma, coma[,] and Uncle Ralph From:Joyce Flaherty <flahertj -at- SMTPGW -dot- LIEBERT -dot- COM> Date:Wed, 10 May 1995 14:54:59 EST
If I just had a few hours for a good old fashion flame!
DOD standards are good for at least a few thousand words.
But I don't have a few hours, so I'll limit my comments to
independent contractors and the "shall" word.
joyce
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Comma, comma, coma[,] and Uncle Ralph
Author: lfc -at- SOL -dot- CHINALAKE -dot- NAVY -dot- MIL at INTERNET
Date: 5/12/95 7:16 AM
> snip, snip, snip
> Part of my job is to review a contractor's software documents for
> those qualities and for compliance with DOD standards. (I'm talking
> about the big defense contractors here, not you independents.)
So there! You independent peons you!--you who have about as much
respect for a standard as a tomcat has for a marriage license!
In milspec language, "consider yourself told!" j
> I want to see "shall" used consistently for provisions that are
> contractually binding.
Personally, I have been on a one-person crusade to eliminate
"shall" from technical documentation. Does it mean 1) likely
to happen in the future, or 2) mandatory? j
> lfc -at- sol -dot- chinalake -dot- navy -dot- mil
