On 1/6/2010 11:53 PM, Sak wrote:
Well, I think it's actually somewhat important to others. I mean, why not educate the reader in the terminology that's commonly used so that there isn't any confusion later? From my understanding, the term dialog, in reference to a computer program, is fairly standard in the industry, and Gary's definition is accurate--the program is attempting to have a dialog with its user so that it can continue its operation. Beyond a user picking up another book about a different computer program, the help OOo documentation authors saw it fit to use the term dialog in its proper context, so if a reader tries to use the help in conjunction with one of the manuals or the getting started guides, isn't there an increased possibility for confusion? I think that's where consistency is important.
BTW, Sak used the term "dialog" in the sense that was spelled out in the Motorola/Freescale Semiconductor's style guide when I was employed there as a technical editor before the Freescale spin-off in December 2005. They used "dialog box" in the sense of a telephone, whereas a "dialog" was essentially a conversation carried out with a dialog box, err telephone. IOW, their corporate style guide mandated the strict use of "dialog box" and not "dialog" whenever that GUI component was meant. Other style guides use the same distinction between the terms because they are strictly two different concepts.
Along the way, that distinction was lost by careless writers (or those who somehow believe the two terms are really synonymous). The use of "box" was not really redundant at all, if one properly uses the terminology was it was originally meant by Microsoft, and quite possibly Sun Microsystems...
Gary
