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: via the Internet? From:Sheridan-Smith John <john -dot- sheridan-smith -at- BMWFIN -dot- COM> Date:Fri, 18 Jun 1999 15:19:34 +0100
If the objection to the use of VIA is on the grounds that the audience won't
know what the word means, then I agree that it should not be used. But the
idea that it should not be used because it implies purely geographical
translation doesn't hold much water, whereas a VIAduct holds lots of water.
The Internet is a channel of communication, known belovedly by politicians
as the Information Superhighway. More than that, it is actually a bunch of
physical pipes down which data moves, just as traffic moves down a street.
Many things can be said to go VIA the Internet, including for example, an
e-mail message going convolutedly VIA a number of geographically and
electronically distant locations is just as linguistically valid, it seems
to me, as going VIA Singapore when flying from London to Sydney; not to
mention strolling down the VIA Dolorosa.
I don't think I've ever heard the term "by the Internet" used. Personally I
would only use such a term to describe the family history of a racehorse
called, perhaps, ATM Network.
Regards
John
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------
John -dot- Sheridan-Smith -at- BMWFIN -dot- COM
