Re: Use of "and/or"

[ethanreese -at- hotmail -dot- com]

Interesting feedback.  I personally don't take my issues with the house
style to the ring.  There are some pretty sensitive egos here, and I
figure it's better to simply leave things as they are.  Since I'm hoping
to change away from the environmental field, I don't fancy I'm going to be
here long enough to make it an issue, anyway.

I did, however, just finish a paragraph where I decided the use of
"and/or" was the best choice for adequately portraying a set of
conditions.  One of the kinds of reports I write is called a Phase I
Envrionmental Site Assessment.  In my workplace's house style, there is a
section with a table that details the findings of an envrionmental
database search.  One database lists sites with underground storage tanks
that are in use, removed, or cleaned and left in the ground (states as
"closed in place").  This table lists each site and how many tanks are in
use, how many have been removed, and how many have been closed in place.

In the conclusions section, this information is repeated.  It seems a
little redundant, but I figure it is to remind the reader of the
conditions being described in relation to the conclusions being drawn. It
keeps the information a little fresher than saying "see Section 4." The
second time, however, the information is largely summarized.

So, for example, the first section may have a listing like:

MACKLEY GAS STATION - UST
One tank removed from site.
Two tanks closed in place.

AMOCO #5221 - UST
Three tanks closed in place.

BEAKMAN'S TRUCKING - UST
Four tanks removed from site.

In the conclusions section, however, the three sites from this example
would get grouped into one category - sites that are no longer using
underground storage tanks for one reason or another.

For the sake of clarity, I think writing "Two sites with tanks removed and
two sites with tanks closed in place" would be confusing.  It sounds like
there are four sites rather than three.

Writing "One site with tanks both removed and closed in place, one site
with tanks removed, and one site with tanks closed in place" seems like
overkill.  So, I opted to put "three sites with tanks removed and/or
closed in place."

I guess it's one of those things that is best avoided if it's excessively
wordy, pompous, or confusing, and used judiciously if it's the best option
for preventing confusion.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT - EDIT AND REVIEW, REDEFINED
Accelerate the document lifecycle with full online discussions and unique feedback-management capabilities. Unlimited, efficient reviews for Word
and FrameMaker authors. Live, online demo:
http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l

Your Ad Here! Have a product or service you'd like to get some attention for? Use this space to get the word out! Contact lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com for more details.

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.