Maybe we should change it to "This page intentionally left almost
completely blank," to be more technically accurate :)
Regards,
Shmuel Wolfson
052-763-7133
Combs, Richard wrote:
Daniel Emory wrote:
Certainly I don't advocate the use of MIL specs for preparing
commercial manual
cists, how do we stop people from coining derogatory phrases using our
religions, ethnicity, and color? This is a land of the free and the brave.
However, some self-regulation is in order.
Where is the moderator?
In response to:
From: "Combs, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subj
Maybe we should change it to "This page intentionally left almost
completely blank," to be more technically accurate :)
Regards,
Shmuel Wolfson
052-763-7133
Combs, Richard wrote:
Daniel Emory wrote:
Certainly I don't advocate the use of MIL specs for preparing
commercial manuals.
cists, how do we stop people from coining derogatory phrases using our
religions, ethnicity, and color? This is a land of the free and the brave.
However, some self-regulation is in order.
Where is the moderator?
In response to:
From: "Combs, Richard"
Subject: OT: MIL specs (was RE:
Daniel Emory wrote:
> The fact is that the US military is the only true laboratory
> where technical documentation is subjected to extensive
> post-publication review to determine its effectiveness in the
> real world. Findings resulting from analyses of actual
> foul-ups lead to continuing
Daniel Emory wrote:
> Certainly I don't advocate the use of MIL specs for preparing
> commercial manuals. I do know, however, that most tech
> writers who produce manuals for commercial products remain
> blissfully unaware of the problems caused by their outputs.
A valid point. Although so
Certainly I don't advocate the use of MIL specs for
preparing commercial manuals. I do know, however, that
most tech writers who produce manuals for commercial
products remain blissfully unaware of the problems
caused by their outputs.
Unlike typical users of commercial products, most
users of MI
Daniel Emory wrote:
> Certainly I don't advocate the use of MIL specs for preparing
> commercial manuals. I do know, however, that most tech
> writers who produce manuals for commercial products remain
> blissfully unaware of the problems caused by their outputs.
A valid point. Although som
Certainly I don't advocate the use of MIL specs for
preparing commercial manuals. I do know, however, that
most tech writers who produce manuals for commercial
products remain blissfully unaware of the problems
caused by their outputs.
Unlike typical users of commercial products, most
users of MI
Daniel Emory wrote:
> The fact is that the US military is the only true laboratory
> where technical documentation is subjected to extensive
> post-publication review to determine its effectiveness in the
> real world. Findings resulting from analyses of actual
> foul-ups lead to continuing
10 matches
Mail list logo
