TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
>The TinWoodman4 heart is fully backward compatible with the latest patch
for TinWoodman3.<
Should this be backwards compatible? (Or backwardly compatible?)
I've been searching the net for backward compatible, backwards compatible,
and backwardly compatible. The most common usage seems to be the first:
backward compatible.
Is it always acceptable simply to say that something is "backward
compatible" with something else?
Jane Carnall
Technical Writer, Compaq, France
Unless stated otherwise, these opinions are mine, and mine alone.
