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.
Subject:Re: Anthropomorphism is bad because... From:Lauren <lauren -at- writeco -dot- net> To:techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com Date:Fri, 18 Jun 2010 09:33:17 -0700
On 6/18/2010 8:52 AM, McLauchlan, Kevin wrote:
> But what actually is wrong/bad/evil/hurtful/crushingly-destructive-of-communication
> to say that a complex computerized system "expects" a certain input or range of
> inputs in a given situation? (... and gets miffed if you try to feed it
> anything else....... ok, that's a bit extreme).
I think a system can "expect" data or other input. What are the
arguments against "expectation"? The term itself implies that the
system will "wait" for input that meets certain requirements, that it
will "reject" a process when it receives non-conforming input, and that
it will "process" input that it receives. The term "expect" carries a
lot of content within the scope of computer systems. If the only reason
to reject the term is that it sounds to human, then what it is it about
"expectation" that is too human for computer systems?
Gain access to everything you need to create and publish documentation,
manuals, and other information through multiple channels. Choose
authoring (and import) as well as virtually any output you may need. http://www.doctohelp.com/
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-