Re: lexical question - recursion, capitalizing names

[Susan Stewart <susan -at- AVALANCHE -dot- COM>]

Matt Hicks (in response to Lisa Kaytes)

 > .......deletions.......
 >Better still, to our way of thinking, a nonproportional font becomes a
 >symbol indicating that the term is part of the program's dialect ("language"
 >would be confusing here) and should not be treated as a regular part of the
 >English language.
 >........deletions.......
 >it is better to use such descriptive terms than arcane, made-
 >up ones, because it makes them easier for users to remember, which makes the
 >system seem friendlier, which in the long run, should make our jobs easier.

I vote for (and use) a different font and descriptive terms. While I agree
(with whichever person it was that much earlier in this discussion argued)
that the use of multiple fonts on the same page is distracting, well-defined
and consistent use of a limited number of fonts makes the doc clearer and
more intuitive.

I also think users respond well to familiar terms. Why make the users
learn lots of new vocabulary just to use our product. Where it's *really*
necessary, I'll introduce new terms. Mostly I try to remember that the
user has enough new information to deal with without having to burn brain
cells trying to figure out what I'm talking about.

Susan Stewart
susan -at- avalanche -dot- com