This is about Internet Draft writing skills. And I wish to listen to some wisdom.
I think Readability and comprehensibility are the main goal in writing and organizing
a technical document.
We have plenty of acronyms in this field. Some are public-domain (wide-spread and
well-known) and some are newly defined by the author and are introduced to the
Internet society. (Not ISOC.)
As I demonstrated just now, when I write "ISOC", some people know it very much and
some do not understand it at all.
In technical writings, we MAY fill most parts of the technical document with the bunch
of acronyms - so the document sometimes looks like high-level code language at a
glance. For this we usually define the frequently-used acronyms at the first section
of the document and now the document looks logically organized and technicians feel
comfortable about this.
On the other hand some authors use acronyms extreme-sparingly so that the document
looks so prosaic, with high-top page numbers.
One good example in my mind is node mobility terminologies. We've got MN, CoA, CN, HA,
blah..
Some authors never use these acronyms in the main part of their document. They say,
mobile node, care-of addresses, correspondent node, home agent, eg.,
"A correspondent node sends a packet to the care-of addresses of the mobile node via
its home agent."
Other authors just say: "
"CN sens a packet to CoA of MN via HA."
Which one do you think is better ? :>
Wise answers plz..
Jiwoong
