[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office] Question of writing style?
Hi all, I got in contact with the technical writer that did some work on the OpenOffice.org specification some time ago. I have asked her about our "you can" style question and whether she thinks it is an issue for a specification. That's what she said: > Regarding the "you can" phrases, you are right in saying that I used > the active voice such as "you can include" or "you can associate" in > the rewrite that I did for the XML specification. As I recall, the > original specification contained a lot of passive voice, such as "can > be associated with", "can be included", and so on. The passive voice > tends to be ambiguous, which is not a good thing in a specification, > it is difficult to translate, and is more difficult for non-native > readers to understand. The use of the active voice in technical > documentation is indeed in line with all modern technical > writing standards. As your specification is destined for an > international audience, I would recommend that you retain the use of > the active voice throughout the specification to retain the clarity of > meaning. I suggest that we continue the discussion of the topic in our con call on Monday. Best regards Michael David Faure wrote: > On Sunday 14 November 2004 23:53, Patrick Durusau wrote: > >>Michael, >> >>Since I won't be on the call tomorrow I thought I should tender a few >>written comments about the 'you can' style question. > > > (Same problem here) > > >>It is not improper grammar but a question of the style one uses in >>writing technical standards. >> >>I am not surprised that a native American introduced the phrase, most >>writing in the US being first person and bordering on the familiar. >> >>Not that such a style is necessarily a bad thing, in the proper place >>but I would argue it is inappropriate in standards. > > > My guess is that the person Michael refers to, was writing a user manual - Michael, is that correct? > In a manual that explains how to use an application, using "you" seems perfectly fine to me. > But indeed in a standard specification things are different, and it would be better to avoid using it. >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]