"error framed?" retraction

[Matthew Flynn <maflynn -at- DTTUS -dot- COM>]

Oops.  I guess the original poster did say "error framed".  Mea culpa.
That would be plain wrong.  I'd still prefer "erred frame" or perhaps
"errant frame", but the standard seems to be the invented "errored frame".

--matt flynn
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Correct syntax: "errored frame" or "error framed?"
Author:  "Susan W. Gallagher" <sgallagher -at- EXPERSOFT -dot- COM> at Internet-USA
Date:    12/16/96 12:22 PM


At 12:57 PM 12/16/96 +0200, Harvey Kaniel wrote:
>My client's datasheet contains the following statement:

>The XYZ frame includes the Error Indicator bit which shows
>if the current frame is "errored frame."

>I changed it to "error framed." The client claims this phrase
>is an industry standard and should read: "errored frame."
>Any suggestions as to which is correct?

>If this is not of interest to the list, I will be happy to receive
>responses off line.

It's a fine distinction, to be sure, whether the frame is in error
(errored frame) or there's a frame around the error (error framed).
I'd stick with the orriginal. Your rewrite shades the meaning just
enough to make the client uncomfortable.

It's often uncomfortable for one who deals in the preciseness of
language to accept industry-standard verbiage.  ;-)  But unless
you've got a detailed audience analysis under your belt that
says the target user group definitely does not understand this
phrase, I'd yield to the client.

Just my opinion.

Sue Gallagher
sgallagher -at- expersoft -dot- com
     -- The _Guide_ is definitive.
        Reality is frequently inaccurate.