Re: Using the word "disable"

["Brierley, Sean" <Brierley -at- QUODATA -dot- COM>]

Hallo:

I am outraged that you would offend my Great-Aunt Nellie who died on the
hill for noble reasons that are beyond reproach.

>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Chris Hamilton [mailto:caxdj -at- EARTHLINK -dot- NET]
>>>Absent any
>>>likely user outrage, I have other more important hills to die on.
>>>

<very big grin>

This speaks to a very important issue in technical writing, though, use of
language. As we (the list) discussed with the word "niggardly," it boils
down to "know your audience."

>>>The terms we're using on the GUI that allows you to make such selections
>>>are "enable" and "disable." For internal political reasons, I don't want
>>>to raise this issue unless it's likely to offend people

I cannot imagine any reason how using the term disable in this manner could
raise the spectre of offensive language, but obviously I am not
representative of the group because, clearly, Chris can imagine such a
circumstance.

I think, as technical writers, we use the language as clearly and concisely
as possible. If the language we use has overtones of something dark, even if
those overtones call on a mis-perception, then the language is less clear.
If our audience is distracted by double-entendres, unintended meanings, or
any societal stigma attached to a set of words, then we, as writers, must
anticipate this need and change our writing accordingly.

I use the word disable to mean turn off, inactive, etc., as in "disable a
check box." I would use disable in this case. However, if your audience is
likely to be sensitive to the term, find another.

Isn't language grand!!!

All the best.

Sean
sean -at- quodata -dot- com

 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=