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.
I was re-writing a programmer's document to include in the user manual.
He used the word "expensive" to indicate that that a procedure used a lot
of system resources. Now I'm a big believer in using the fewest words to
get my point across, but I found myself saying "uses an excessive amount
of system resources" in order to be more specific and accurate.
The question, of course, is, are there times when more words are better
than fewer? Should one >>always<< avoid colloqualisms, even when the target
audience will certainly understand what is meant? Should one always err
on the side of accuracy even when it means using more words?
Syntelligence Systems, Inc.
mikec -at- syntel -dot- com OR
mchristi -at- netcom -dot- com
btw - what I actually said was "too much system resources" but I didn't
want you vultures out there jumping on my use of the
adjectve "much" with the plural "resources" and missing the basic
question I was trying to ask. :-) ;-)