It's Friday which probably explains why I'm putting in my 2 cents for the first time.
To answer your question, I haven't given it much thought. Subtle enough for you? :-). But if you think about it, all professional writers were "wannabes" unless that is --they were born with a golden ... what was that a spoon or quill you say? Seriously, if the beef is there, it probably doesn't or shouldn't matter how it's being served as long as it tastes good or is understandable, and, it probably wouldn't make a difference if the waiter or contributor comes from China or some other part of Eastern European and has a peculiar way of serving the beef or data. But then again, that is just me and my 2 cents. And, more importantly it's Friday! :-) > -----Original Message----- > From: docs-discuss-bounces at opensolaris.org [mailto:docs-discuss- > bounces at opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Diane Plampin > Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 9:02 AM > To: Rainer Heilke > Cc: docs-discuss at opensolaris.org > Subject: Re: [docs-discuss] Re: Review Request: style guide TOC > > I would love to hear some general thoughts on this kind of thing. > > I'm one of those anal editor types (with apologies to my editor > friends) who paid a lot attention to nuances like page breaks, > orphans/widows, stringent compliance to style, and the like. > I've always believed that those kinds of things separate > the professional writer from the "wannabes." > > Obviously, if the information is inaccurate, incomplete, or poorly > worded, the doc doesn't meet customer needs, whether or not > it has an orphan or widow. But assuming the information is > good quality, how important are style nuances to members > of this community? > > - Diane > > > > Rainer Heilke wrote On 01/12/06 16:29,: > > There is one thing I've noticed in documentation, and I feel should be > considered an "error", or whatever the polite, editorial term is. :-) > > > > At the bottom of page 84, there is an "Incorrect:" followed by the > example, then a "Correct:". The associated example is at the top of the > following page. As an end user of documentation that did this sort of > thing, I have found this jarring. I would suggest a forced page break, and > the "Correct:" with example following all on the same (next) page. > > > > That's my first "put back" so far. :-) > > > > Rainer > > PS I haven't seen mention of orphans and widows yet, but I also haven't > noticed any, either! ;-) > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > > _______________________________________________ > > docs-discuss mailing list > > docs-discuss at opensolaris.org > > -- > Diane Plampin > Manager > Information Products Group > CNS/Solaris Release and Install > ph. 303-272-3165 (73165), fax 303-272-7736 > > _______________________________________________ > docs-discuss mailing list > docs-discuss at opensolaris.org
