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.
I disagree. "Backward compatible" carries the implication that Version 4
can work with Version 4's data, but not vice versa. Compare that to Word
2000's files being compatible with Word 97's.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Geoff Hart [mailto:Geoff-H -at- MTL -dot- FERIC -dot- CA]
>
> This is the wording I'm most familiar with, but although it's
> well-accepted
> jargon, I'm mostly convinced it's unnecessary jargon. Simply
> saying "Version
> 4 is compatible with Version 3" should suffice in the vast
> majority of cases
> because "backward" is redundant; if the reader can't figure
> out that going
> from version 4 to version 3 is backwards, they need to
> install the Scarecrow
> 1.1 upgrade.
