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:There's gotta be a better name for this field From:Linda Castellani <linda -at- GRIC -dot- COM> Date:Mon, 13 Jul 1998 15:14:45 -0700
Let me add that the longer description field *does not* print anywhere and
is only for the user's edification.
>Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 14:53:50 -0700
>Reply-To: Linda Castellani <linda -at- GRIC -dot- COM>
>Sender: "Technical Writers List; for all Technical Communication issues"
> <TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU>
>From: Linda Castellani <linda -at- GRIC -dot- COM>
>Subject: There's gotta be a better name for this field
>To: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
>
>Ack! I'm hoping you can help me.
>
>I'm documenting a function that defines charges and credits. There are
>four fields on this screen, three of which are astoundingly vague. I made
>acceptible suggestions for two of them, but am at a stalemate with the
>developers on the third. The field is currently called "Label." It is
>followed by a field called "Description."
>
>There seems to be a consensus that the field contains whatever prints on
>the invoice next to the charge or credit. But they say it can't be called
>"Invoice Text" or the like because the charge or credit might also appear
>somewhere else, not just on the invoice. There is also a consensus that
>what the field is for is to enter a short (50 character) version of what
>appears in the longer (255 character) description field. (Don't ask me
>why; seems kinda silly to me.) So, I've been given two choices: I can
>either agree to leave it at "Label" or it can be changed to "Short
>Description." I am not happy with either of these, but those are my only
>choices, unless I come up with something better. This is the time when I
>wish I had fellow tech writers to brainstorm with, but since I don't, I'm
>hoping that you foks can help. What's a better name for this field?
>*\ *\ *\ *\ *\ *\ *\ *\ *\ *\ *
>*/ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ *
>Linda Castellani
>Technical Writer
>GRIC Communications, Inc.
>1421 McCarthy Blvd.
>Milpitas, CA 95035
>
>408.965.1169
>408.955.1968 - fax
>
>linda -at- gric -dot- com
><http://www.gric.com>
>
>
>
>
>
*\ *\ *\ *\ *\ *\ *\ *\ *\ *\ *
*/ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ *
Linda Castellani
Technical Writer
GRIC Communications, Inc.
1421 McCarthy Blvd.
Milpitas, CA 95035
