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: lexical question - recursion, capitalizing names From:Chuck Banks <chuck -at- ASL -dot- DL -dot- NEC -dot- COM> Date:Wed, 30 Jun 1993 07:29:02 CDT
For Fred Jacobson, who writes:
>Regarding "capitalizing language elements," at least one popular language
>(the C programming language) is case-sensitive, so this is not generally
>possible. (I prefer using boldface to distinguish keywords, names of
>functions, and the like, but some writers I have worked with think this
>puts too much bold on a typical page and makes it harder to read. I
>disagree.)
At NECAM, we use a non-proportional font for command names, sample
commands, etc. In FrameMaker, we use Courier bold. In Xerox GlobalView,
we use Terminal bold or Bold PS. The change in font provides some
structural advantages (examples on the page or screen appear much as
they do on actual displays), and no one has complained that such
bolded characters distract or confuse them.
If your employer's documentation guidelines/standards permit, you might
try such a substitution and see how your audience reacts.
Best Regards
--
__ ________ ______
|\\ | || // Chuck Banks
| \\ | ||_______ || Senior Technical Writer
| \\ | || || NEC America, Inc.
| \\| \\______ \\______ E-Mail: chuck -at- asl -dot- dl -dot- nec -dot- com
America, Incorporated CompuServe: 72520,411
