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: Shortcut vs. Accelerator keys From:Peter Kent <techwr -at- ARUNDEL -dot- COM> Date:Fri, 6 Jun 1997 08:22:49 -0600
> It is quite possible that not all people want to be Microsoft zombies.
> There just *may* be a better way out there. Maybe someone at Microsoft
> made a poor decision. It could happen.
>>
I agree entirely. First, I think the MS style guide is mistaken on this
issue. Shortcut keys and accelerator keys are very different things:
Accelerator Key:
1. You can only use it in conjunction with a screen element such as a menu
option, dialog-box button, or other dialog-box component (such as an option
button, check box, or drop-down list box).
2. You don't need to remember Accelerator keys, because whenever you're able
to use them they're visible--a letter is underlined.
Shortcut Key:
1. You can use it in the program's workspace--the key sequence is not used
in conjunction with any particular screen component.
2. You have to remember or look up the shortcut-key sequence, because it's
not displayed anywhere at the point at which you want to use it; it may be
shown in a menu, but it won't work in the menu.
Furthermore, the software industry has treated these two items as very
different things for years. Generally speaking, developer's documentation
refers to those little underlines as "accelerator keys," for example.
In any case, who said Microsoft gets to name everything these days? Just
because MS writes the software doesn't mean the names they give things make
sense. For instance, MS can't decide whether to use the term Home Page or
Start Page in its browser; it uses both terms in different places, and
switches terms between versions...really smart. The next version of the
style guide will probably call these things "convenience keys" or something.
Who wrote the MS style guide anyway? What is it about MS that persuades us
that these people know about language? And just because someone at MS
decides that you should call something this or that, in spite of the fact
that these things have been called something else for a long time, does that
mean we have to switch? If I want to say "click on" instead of "click" (or
is it the other way around?), I'll do it, and MS be damned.
What really amazes me, though, is that some people actually buy the *Wired*
style guide! Why would anyone want to copy that atrocious "look-at-us-we-jus
t-got-out-of-diapers-and-figured-out-all-the-neat-things-you-can-do-with-a-d
esktop-publishing-program-and-don't-really-care-how-easy-it-is-to-read"
style?
Peter Kent
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Coming in the fall, the revised Technical Writer's Freelancing
Guide. New Title: Making Money in Technical Writing. 80 percent
more info. See http://www.arundel.com/techwr for more...
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/ or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html
