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: Usage of "mapping" From:Chris Kowalchuk <chris -at- BDK -dot- NET> Date:Mon, 28 Jun 1999 10:34:13 -0400
I had always supposed that the term "mapping", used in the contexts
discussed thus far in this thread, is an extension of the mathematical
concept of mapping (for example, mapping particular coordinates of a
rise/run expression, i.e. producing a graph of all or some subset of the
range possible for the expression). Thus it can refer to any
substitution of one type of data for another, as long as there is a one
to one correspondance between them. No doubt it gets more complex than
that, but that's where my understanding reaches its limits.
