Re: Computers aren't hammers (more on passives)

Subject: Re: Computers aren't hammers (more on passives)
From: Jim Grey <jwg -at- ACD4 -dot- ACD -dot- COM>
Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 10:38:45 -0500

Richard Burnham wisely worded it this way:
> "You can [achieve xxxxx].

> [step-by-step instructions to achieve xxxxx]"

I prefer your way, but our style guide (idiotically) prohibits "you". So:

To [achieve xxxxx]:

I have, though, declared "Style Guide be damned!" and use "you" when it
makes sense. I have found that some manuals are "you" happy; often, the
direct instruction leaves "you" out.

(Crazy thing is, I compiled our Style Guide. This rule wasn't my idea, but
it was two against one.)

Peace,
jim grey
--
jim grey |"Ain't nothin' better in the world, you know
jwg -at- acd4 -dot- acd -dot- com |Than lyin' in the sun, listenin' to the radio" - D. Boone
jimgrey -at- delphi -dot- com|GO/M d p+ c++(-) l u+ e- m*@ s+/ n+ h f++ g- w+@ t+ r- y+(*)
|ACD, Terre Haute, IN -- The Silicon Cornfield


Previous by Author: Re: How do I show an example?
Next by Author: Re: how do you....
Previous by Thread: Re: Computers aren't hammers (more on passives)
Next by Thread: rates that contractors charge


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads