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.
It's interesting how many discussions we've had on this list about how
Wikipedia "can't be trusted" because anyone can edit it, and yet so
often people use Google results as some sort of definitive answer as
to whether or not a phrase is acceptable usage.
There are editors on Wikipedia. You can't say that about the vast
majority of the net. (Not saying Wikipedia is an infallible source,
but I often use it as a starting point for getting a basic
understanding for some topic that I've never heard of before.)
Which (to bring this OT tangent back around to the OP's question) is
why I pointed towards several published (as in hard copy) sources,
including computer books found on Amazon, as points in favor of
Client/Server as the accepted usage.
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Milan DavidoviÄ <milan -dot- lists -at- gmail -dot- com> wrote:
> Off the topic, but speaking of using Google as a corpus, this might be
> of interest:
>http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000194.html
>
> --
> Milan DavidoviÄ
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Create and publish documentation through multiple channels with Doc-To-Help. Choose your authoring formats and get any output you may need.
Try Doc-To-Help, now with MS SharePoint integration, free for 30-days.
