 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / February 2007Word Document - am I just too technical?
Greetings everyone - I appreciate all the help with my question regarding "size vs. sized." I have another question. There will be considerably less debate, I'm sure. I'd really appreciate some advice. I'll try be brief. I'm a recent college graduate. I work for a small company and I'm primarily doing web design. We are reworking our company website. The marketing department sends the text to the designer. The designer designs the pages. I write the code. However, I have a tendency to be overly critical. I can't help it. We are a publishing company, and when I see questionable grammar, I question it. Needless to say, this upsets certain people who are very concerned with power and control. One particular issue that bothers me is the marketing department's assumption that "word document" is a generic way to describe any document created with a computer that contains text. For example: "Type your entries in a word document and send them to us via email or CD." This caught my eye, for obvious reasons. However, I was told that since I am a "technical" person, I "read too far" into things. "Most people understand word document to be any document created on a computer." The fact is, a few paragraphs later you'll find the "acceptable formats." These include Word, Works, Publisher, InDesign, QuarkXPress, and a few others. I pointed out "word document" is confusing. Not only is it incorrect to not capitalize "word document," it isn't the only acceptable format. Advice? Suggestions? Should it always be Microsoft Word Document? Word Document? Word document? I'm young - I've only had this job for 8 months. I don't want to cause a stir or upset anyone. The marketing department (basically one person - early 30s) has made it clear that she likes control and she doesn't like to be told she is wrong. How can I elegantly explain that "word document" is incorrect? What do you do if faced with this situation? Is the "real world" essentially "dealing with it," "doing what you are told," and not getting worked up over grammar? The fact is, she is a really nice person. We get along fine. I don't want to cause a problem at work, and I certainly don't want to jeopardize my job. I also don't want to appear that I'm picking everything apart. I understand and respect her authority, but what can I do? I feel stuck. Thanks for reading this. Any help would be appreciated. gonnabespammy wrote: (snipped) > I'll try be brief. (snipped for brevity) > One particular issue that bothers me is the marketing department's > assumption that "word document" is a generic way to describe any > document created with a computer that contains text. (snipped for brevity) > Should it always be Microsoft Word Document? Yes. > Word Document? Word document? No, word processor document. > I'm young - I've only had this job for 8 months. (snipped for brevity) > I understand and respect her authority, but what can I do? Keep your mouth shut and perform your work as directed. Purl Gurl > Keep your mouth shut and perform your work as directed. Yes, Ma'am. Sorry. gonnabespammy wrote: >> Keep your mouth shut and perform your work as directed. > Yes, Ma'am. Sorry. Mine is amongst the best of advice to be given. You are young and not long on the job. You are not entitled to critique your superiors nor those with seniority. Doing so will lead to friction between you and others. However, you already know this evidenced by your own words, BEGIN The marketing department (basically one person - early 30s) has made it clear that she likes control and she doesn't like to be told she is wrong. I don't want to cause a problem at work, and I certainly don't want to jeopardize my job. I also don't want to appear that I'm picking everything apart. I understand and respect her authority.... END Keep your mouth shut and perform your work as directed. Name of this corporate game is, "kiss a.s." Reminds me of a conversation I enjoyed with a darling Girl Scout selling Girl Scout cookies in front of my favorite grocery store. "What is the price for your cookies?" "Three dollars." "How many packages of cookies inside?" "Three." "Ok, I want to buy three packages of cookies for a dollar each." "No, you can't. The cookies are three dollars." "You told me there are three packages. I want to buy all three for one dollar each." "The cookies are three dollars, lady." "Well, then I have to pay you nine dollars for those cookies." "No, no, the cookies are three dollars each!" "But you told me your box of cookies is three dollars." "Huh?" "Ok, whatever, would you like to double your money?" "What?" "Would you like to make twice the amount of money?" "Um, I guess so." "You guess so or know so?" "Yeah, I guess so." "I guessed so. Do you want to double your money or not?" "Huh?" "Here is three dollars." "Thank you, lady!" "Take these cookies back." "But you bought the cookies." "I know, now take these cookies back." "Ok, whatever." "Now you have three dollars in this hand, and cookies in that hand." "Yeah, I guess so." "If you want to double your money, you must figure out what to do." --- With this said, I give my shopping cart full of champagne and strawberries a good shove, and chase along behind, waddling away. Almost to my classic five-hundred horsepower asphalt buckling Corvette, I hear her shout after me, "Thank you, lady, thank you!" I turn and holler back, "I ain't no lady." Within the corporate world, if you want to double your money, you must learn how to play the game, and play the game to win. Now, down on your knees and kiss my ring. For this act, I will buy you a box of Girl Scout cookies, and do not slobber. Purl Gurl OK - I do see your point. Down the road when I am interviewing for another job: Interviewer: I noticed you don't know to capitalized a proper noun. I also see you don't understand the difference between a word processing document and a Microsoft Word Document. Me: I understand the error. I was following instructions. ------- I understand. Life is a game, I suppose. gonnabespammy@gmail.com filted: >OK - I do see your point. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >I understand. >Life is a game, I suppose. They may not let it get as far as an interview if you've got something like that out there with your name on it.... Suggest you insist to the control freak that you would like your name removed from the document...tell them to give credit to Alan Smithee instead....r  Signature"You got Schadenfreude on my Weltanschauung!" "You got Weltanschauung in my Schadenfreude!" gonnabespammy wrote: > OK - I do see your point. Rather sharp point poke in the eye, yes? > Down the road when I am interviewing for another job: Employers do not hire those who switch jobs frequently. Expectation is you will remain at your current job for at least five years. Who knows? Play this game to win and you might be the boss at your job, in five years. > Interviewer: I noticed you don't know to capitalized a proper noun. > I also see you don't understand the difference between a word > processing document and a Microsoft Word Document. Oh no, no, you provide a portfolio of your past works. You do not allow a prospective employer to seek out your work. You burn a CD with your best (and corrected) works to include with your résumé. You take control of and charge of your employment interview. You produce the end result you want, not allow another to produce whatever results, which may not be favorable. Part of playing the corporate game is learning how to effectively sell yourself. Purl Gurl > gonnabespammy wrote: (snipped) >> OK - I do see your point. > Rather sharp point poke in the eye, yes? > Part of playing the corporate game is learning how to > effectively sell yourself. This is an addendum, Bobby! I am NOT talking to myself, not in public, at least. --- This is what happens when you are young, fresh, just starting out, uppity and do not know well how to sell yourself. This is what happens when you are a young half breed near illiterate squaw straight from Oklahoma to California desperately seeking work. You end up working as a model for a cheesy modeling agency whose best client is an equally cheesy truck stop out in the middle of nowhere Southern California desert. Your agency dresses you in a cheesy F-me red swim suit, garish accessories and Wicked Witch of the West slip on red shoes, then plops your big fat butt down in a big rig asphalt parking lot to greet truckers as they arrive, under a blistering hot desert sun and three digit air temperature which bring this black asphalt to a slow bubbling simmer. Your first trucker you greet, you discover he is a big beer bellied fatso, tobacco chewing, teeth missing, a.s scratching farting illiterate from Georgia who grins, grabs your big fat butt, then insists you join him for an eloquent meal of greasy Sloppy Joes and warm beer in a cheesy truck stop diner filled with big beer bellied fat illiterate men who ogle you, wolf whistle and slap your big fat butt as you walk by. After escaping trucker black grease groping hands, after you puke up half a Sloppy Joe chased by body temperature beer, you return to this asphalt oven only to be bored to death, and only to glare at your employers for their selling your body to beer bellied fat tobacco juice drooling truck drivers who sleep in their clothes for a week in a filthy sleeper cab, baseball cap on. You are bored, you glare, then desperately seek conversation with a concrete dinosaur, who refuses to quit staring at you, refuses to quit laughing at you because you are stuck out there in this parking just like the dinosaur. Adding injury to hot insult, your cheesy modeling agency insists you pose for polaroid pictures with those unwashed truck drivers, who sling a fat hairy arm around you, grab your left tit, then grin while saying cheese, and while cutting the cheese. "Lookie here at me, Bubba! That there is me and some truck stop whore! She done got big tits and a big plump butt! Mo' cushion fer the pushin'!" Shoot, you end up on the dashboard of two dozen big rigs, drivers grinning and spreading the good buddy word on CB radios about that brown skinned truck stop whore over in Cabazon, California, "I done got a picture of me and her, good buddy! She done be a big ten-four, sho nuff!" This is what happens when you are young, inexperienced and believe yourself to be a hot sh.t go-getter. Pffttt... http://www.purlgurl.net/aue/dinosaur05a.jpg Purl Gurl You can steal my heart, purl gurl, but I'll sleep well tonight knowing you wont be stealing my web development job. gonnabespammy wrote: > You can steal my heart, purl gurl, Nah, I am the type of girl who will rip your heart out! I would not steal your heart, however. I am very honest, bluntly honest. > but I'll sleep well tonight knowing > you wont be stealing my web development job. I am filthy rich and retired. Why would I steal your job? * honest demure smile * Purl Gurl > > gonnabespammy wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > This is an addendum, Bobby! I am NOT talking to myself, > not in public, at least. You call it what you want I'll call it what it is. Hell, Kira, you don't even bother with a pretext anymore. You just post whatever you feel like posting. If no one gives you something to respond to, you tack on a few more paragraphs and call it an "addendum," as if being in Latin makes it somehow less ugly, and keep right on going. It is, of course, true of most of us here that we just post whatever we feel like posting. But most of us have some sort of internal censor that stops us before we become ridiculous. And after a few doeses of your lengthy, semi-literate, off-topic ramblings (most of which I ignore; I'd have ignored this one if I hadn't seen my name while scrolling through, and even so I didn't read any of what I snipped) people just give up on you. I pretty much have. But there are always a few intrepid souls, or newbies, or the terminally bored, who are available to you as an audience. So play to them. Why do I bother? SignatureOne Very Tired Barrister >>> gonnabespammy wrote: (snipped) > You just post whatever you feel like posting. > It is, of course, true of most of us here that > we just post whatever we feel like posting. Not ok for me to post as I want. Ok for you to post as you want. Uh oh! Reads to be rancid hypocrisy! > Why do I bother? Because you love me! I am the best entertainer to strut her stuff in this newsgroup over the past thirty-five years! You are skipping your anger management classes, again, yes? Purl Gurl >And after a few >doeses of your lengthy, semi-literate, off-topic ramblings I didn't read this post because Kira's posts are OK in small doses, but not something you want to read three times a night. But "semi-literate"? Harsh, Bob, and pure reverse hyperbole. "Semiliterate" (not hyphenated where I see it defined) is "barely able to read and write". Kira surpasses that by a long shot. I think you confuse adopted style with literacy. And, it's obvious that the style is used like the Van Heusen guy's eye-patch: purely for effect. I have no doubt that Kira is capable of writing paragraphs in what you would consider to be a literate style. In a perverse way, she is very much on-topic. That is, if you consider that English usage is the topic here (and not religion, sheep, food, and musical preferences), and that challenges to standard usage present opportunities for topical discussion. We have other challenges, like whether or not "people" is the plural of "person", but - My God! - the possibilities of an interesting result in pursuing that topic range from nil to nothing. Speaking of redundancy in expression (which I wasn't, but now I will), can you give me an example of a rambling post that is not lengthy? I will give you the point-not-made that she often makes errors and makes some truly bizarre defenses of them, but "semi-literate"? SignatureTony Cooper Orlando, FL [ ... ] > And, it's obvious that the style > is used like the Van Heusen guy's eye-patch: purely for effect. Oy! (The eye-patch guy was in ads for Hathaway shirts <http://tinyurl.com/2rn8ln>). The effect is emetic. [ ... ] > Speaking of redundancy in expression (which I wasn't, but now I will), > can you give me an example of a rambling post that is not lengthy? Repetition purely for effect, Tony, purely for effect. Not all redundancies are redundant. > I will give you the point-not-made that she often makes errors and > makes some truly bizarre defenses of them, but "semi-literate"? Hey, she may be fully literate in Cherokee, but what she posts to AUE is some weird facsimile of English. Would "semi-coherent" make you happier? Apropos of which, and speaking of coincidences (which I wasn't, but now I will), check out the title of this one: <http://blog.soldouttotheman.com/>. Let's let PG have the last word. She won't shut up until she gets it. SignatureBobby Barrister >[ ... ] > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Oy! (The eye-patch guy was in ads for Hathaway shirts ><http://tinyurl.com/2rn8ln>). I will defer to Purl Gurl in formulating a defense of this alleged error in attribution. I'm sure she can find a way to make Van Heusen = Hathaway = shirt = all means the same. She is an expert in walking backwards in the forest of aue and sweeping away her tracks. >Repetition purely for effect, Tony, purely for effect. Not all >redundancies are redundant. Perhaps when speaking of cigars. >> I will give you the point-not-made that she often makes errors and >> makes some truly bizarre defenses of them, but "semi-literate"? SignatureTony Cooper Orlando, FL >>> And, it's obvious that the style >>> is used like the Van Heusen guy's eye-patch: purely for effect. >>Oy! (The eye-patch guy was in ads for Hathaway shirts > I will defer to Purl Gurl in formulating a defense of this alleged > error in attribution. I'm sure she can find a way to make Van Heusen > = Hathaway = shirt = all means the same. She is an expert in walking > backwards in the forest of aue and sweeping away her tracks. This "eye patch" man, no hyphen, is mistakenly associated with both Van Heusen shirts and Hathaway shirts, both of which are manufactured in the same factory over in Malaysia by children who are paid five cents an hour to work twelve hour days so three piece suit types can flash pompous peacock feathers. Same shirt, different brand name tag attached. Nonetheless, I personally know of two good reasons why an eye patch is not a great "effect" device, real or fake. I personally know of two good natural reasons why other devices are better for dramatic effect. http://www.purlgurl.net/~stocks/graphics/misc/two_good.jpg Purl Gurl > Hey, she may be fully literate in Cherokee, Chahta iskitini anumpuli li. "Choctaw" > but what she posts to AUE is some weird facsimile of English. > Would "semi-coherent" make you happier? My direct observation, Bobby, is your reading comprehension skills are acceptable level challenged. Purl Gurl >> And after a few >> doeses of your lengthy, semi-literate, off-topic ramblings > I didn't read this post because Kira's posts are OK in small doses, > but not something you want to read three times a night. Oh, come now! I am intense but not too intense! > But "semi-literate"? Harsh, Bob, and pure reverse hyperbole. > "Semiliterate" (not hyphenated where I see it defined) is "barely able > to read and write". Kira surpasses that by a long shot. I think you > confuse adopted style with literacy. And, it's obvious that the style > is used like the Van Heusen guy's eye-patch: purely for effect. You are spot on. Clearly I have a skill to write using virtually any style I choose. This ability of mine to switch styles between breath is quite well exemplified within my writings published to this newsgroup. This is evidence both read and witnessed by many, and independently verifiable by any through examination of archives of articles for this newsgroup; my writings are public domain available to all. Your chosen writing style is your own and is inherently different than Robert's, Bob's, Skitt's, different than my style and styles of all others. Typically, each person develops a writing style then, as time passes, each person acquires an ability to change writing styles. Some choose to stick with a selected writing style, others choose to experiment with writing styles, and yet others choose to use as many writing styles as possible, within given abilities and personal comfort, sometimes beyond those limits. My choice is to write in a style which strikes me as fit for circumstances or, often, a style reflecting my concurrent mood. My moods may and do vary most wildly; I am a moody woman. Applying a label of "semiliterate" to my writings, as you note, Tony, is certainly inappropriate. Readers are well aware I am exceptionally literate, as are almost all who participate here; people here are talented and smart. Nonetheless, Robert's label of "semiliterate" for my writings is not a result of actual fact rather is a result of his being annoyed with me, for personal reasons which are truly the business of none save for Robert. I sincerely believe a good part of Robert's annoyance with me is based upon this new topic about which you write; personal writing style. Others appear to be annoyed with me for a same or a similar reason. You are not exempt. There are those who are annoyed with you, and you are often annoyed by others. This is a nature of dialog between people, a nature which must be recognized if to survive social circumstances in an amicable fashion. Robert is a lawyer. His writing style is stereotypical for a lawyer. Mine is not a critique rather reflection upon his displayed writing style. His style is dry, mildly without humor, absent of flair, very much court room writings; deliberately dry and tedious. My personal perception is conflict arises resulting from his personal desire to have all write as he writes. This will never happen. Robert and many others, millions of others, need to accept and embrace not only differences in writing style but differences in all things about people; each of us is unique. Tarnations! I'll be sheep dipped before I let some city slicker lawyer tell me how to write! Yes sir, that there attitude done causes me to slip right into my ornery Okie attitude! > I have no doubt that Kira is capable of writing paragraphs in what you > would consider to be a literate style. In a perverse way, she is very > much on-topic. That is, if you consider that English usage is the > topic here (and not religion, sheep, food, and musical preferences), > and that challenges to standard usage present opportunities for > topical discussion. You are making use of "that" too much for my liking! I am pleased to learn, which I already knew, you recognize this importance of pushing language usage to the limits. Without creativity, without imagination, without experimentation, there is no progress; life becomes stagnant. Should all here elect to employ the same writing style, this group would eventually become extinct because of terminal boredom; people here would become mindless Borgs. Giving myself attention, and "I" is not required to justify "myself" for this usage, giving myself attention which is my only purpose as all know, my advantage is years of experience as a classroom teacher. Often unknown to those outside of educational environments, teachers must develop an acting ability, must develop an exceptional ability to character role play. Best lessons are not taught from books nor from ditto copies. Best lessons are taught with significant animation and a dash of wildness. An example is many teachers, such as I, will wear a costume while teaching, a costume appropriate for class topic. Many of us engage in entertaining "show and tell" activities which students simply love. Those activities, for teachers who are confident enough to enjoyably suffer being laughable, those activities lead to development of many different characters, many different character roles to play. After many years, this ability to slip into character role, becomes limitless. Many of us have at our mental fingertips, an infinite number of characters in mind, all romping around looking to be set free and to be expressed, with vigor and great entertainment value! This annoys Robert and others. This character role playing introduces instability into the minds of those who cannot accept behavior beyond their personal set norms. Instability within minds of those types of people lead to expressions of objection; "Behave as I or else." Fat chance, Bubba! Purl Gurl [...] > Employers do not hire those who switch jobs frequently. Let's enjoy the above self-contradictory sentence. > Expectation is you will remain at your current job for > at least five years. In a computer field? Now I suspect the entire post is a joke. -Dan Damouth > I appreciate all the help with my question regarding "size vs. > sized." I have another question. [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > Should it always be Microsoft Word Document? Word Document? Word > document? I use "MS Word document" or "Microsoft Word document". Never capitalize "document" in such an expression. > I'm young - I've only had this job for 8 months. I don't want to > cause a stir or upset anyone. The marketing department (basically [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > essentially "dealing with it," "doing what you are told," and not > getting worked up over grammar? I would probably get fired if I hadn't already quit working for someone so objectionable, but if I wanted to keep my job, I would simply insert "processor" between "word" and "document", which would make it generic enough. As long as my name doesn't go on the web page as the person responsible for the content of the page, I wouldn't worry about it. You're the page coder, not the content provider, so ignore the content. Keep your day job unless your night job pays better and allows you more control. > The fact is, she is a really nice person. We get along fine. I > don't want to cause a problem at work, and I certainly don't want > to jeopardize my job. I also don't want to appear that I'm > picking everything apart. I understand and respect her authority, > but what can I do? Do your job and don't make unnecessary waves. > I feel stuck. You're taking your job too personally. If you really have to do that, then you will have to quit and start working strictly for yourself. I don't think that posting AUE pays anything that will allow you to put food on the table, but a lot of the posters here seem to manage working this website pro bono. And they have no trouble whatsoever letting other posters know that they (the other posters) are wrong. After all, what do they have to lose? Nothing. But you have a job and a paycheck and a future to lose. It's not worth it. SignatureFranke: EFL teacher & medical editor Native speaker of American English; posting from Taiwan. "It has come to my attention that my opinions are not universally shared." Scott Adams, The Dilbert Blog, 23 Jan 2007; http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/ teranews charges a one-time US$3.95 setup fee -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >> I appreciate all the help with my question regarding "size vs. >> sized." I have another question. [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] >I use "MS Word document" or "Microsoft Word document". Never >capitalize "document" in such an expression. I'm confused on this. No one has suggested "text document", and that seems the logical choice. Word Perfect is still out there. Lotus has some sort of word processing program. Open Office can be used. I understand that the MS Word program is the prevailing choice by users, but it's not the only choice for to create a "word document". Unless the OP's organization accepts only documents created in MS Word, why not "text document"? >I would probably get fired if I hadn't already quit working for >someone so objectionable, but if I wanted to keep my job, I would >simply insert "processor" between "word" and "document", which would >make it generic enough. No one has commented on this, either. At one time, there were "word processors", but they were machines. Documents are created in word processing software, but not by word processors. Am I missing something here? SignatureTony Cooper Orlando, FL > cybercypher <dontbother@easypeasy.com> wrote: [...] >>> Should it always be Microsoft Word Document? Word Document? >>> Word document? [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Unless the OP's organization accepts only documents created in MS > Word, why not "text document"? I would interpret "text document" to mean a document created using a text editor, e.g., MS Notepad. They are generally not formatted (but you can format font size and face with MS Wordpad now). If publishers want documents that can be opened without losing word-processor formatting regardless of the word-processor used, then they specify RTF (Rich Text Format). Medical publishers usually specify Word, but most will also add WordPerfect, and some will add RTF. >>I would probably get fired if I hadn't already quit working for >>someone so objectionable, but if I wanted to keep my job, I would [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Am I missing something here? Those were the old old old days. The language has changed. MS Word and Corel WordPerfect (among a host of other word processers) are both known as "word processors" now. If you do a search {for/on/of} "word processors" using Google, you will find the Wikipedia definition that you give here -- a machine -- but by far most usages refer strictly to word processing software packages. People call MS Excel "a spreadsheet" even though they know that it's software for creating spreadsheets, etc. It's a trope: metonymy or synechdoche again. We do it all the time. So rather than being too technical (except in the nitpickingly pedantic sort of way that so many of us here revel in), you're being definitionally and usage-istically retrograde. Here's the definition of "word processor" from searchwinit.techtarget.com/: [quote] word processor DEFINITION - A word processor is a computer program that provides special capabilities beyond that of a text editor such as the WordPad program that comes as part of Microsoft's Windows operating systems. The term originated to distinguish text building programs that were "easy to use" from conventional text editors, and to suggest that the program was more than just an "editor." An early user of this term was Wang, which made a popular workstation system designed especially for secretaries and anyone else who created business letters and other documents. In general, word processors screen the user from structural or printer-formatting markup (although WordPerfect and other word processors optionally let you see the markup they insert in your text). Without visible markup, it's possible to describe a word processor as having a WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) user interface. The most popular word processor is Microsoft Word, which is often purchased as part of Microsoft's Office suite. However, there are a number of other general and specialized word processors that have a user following. CONTRIBUTORS: Jason Landry LAST UPDATED: 16 Jul 2003 [/quote] http://tinyurl.com/2pnyc9 SignatureFranke: EFL teacher & medical editor Native speaker of American English; posting from Taiwan. "It has come to my attention that my opinions are not universally shared." Scott Adams, The Dilbert Blog, 23 Jan 2007; http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/ teranews charges a one-time US$3.95 setup fee -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >I'm confused on this. No one has suggested "text document", and that >seems the logical choice. Word Perfect is still out there. Lotus has >some sort of word processing program. Open Office can be used. I >understand that the MS Word program is the prevailing choice by users, >but it's not the only choice for to create a "word document". But none of those programs generate would I would consider to be "text" (unless you count the XML goop that some newer versions of these programs generate "text", and in this case I wouldn't). I would call all of those formats instances of "word-processing document", not "text document" (the latter being roughly equivalent to the media type "text/plain"). -GAWollman SignatureGarrett A. Wollman | The real tragedy of human existence is not that we are wollman@csail.mit.edu| nasty by nature, but that a cruel structural asymmetry Opinions not those | grants to rare events of meanness such power to shape of MIT or CSAIL. | our history. - S.J. Gould, Ten Thousand Acts of Kindness just do it it it it it i....t i.....................t........ >>I'm confused on this. No one has suggested "text document", and that >>seems the logical choice. Word Perfect is still out there. Lotus has [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > -GAWollman >>I'm confused on this. No one has suggested "text document", and that >>seems the logical choice. Word Perfect is still out there. Lotus has [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >-GAWollman The problem is that the list of acceptable format to be included in this generic description include InDesign and Quark Xpress -- they most definitely do NOT produce 'word processor documents'. They are page layout programs, and their outputs are unique and proprietary. The term you are looking for is "documents". Not word documents. Not Word documents. Not word-processing documents. Just documents. Anythings else is misleadingly specific. Tony P On 28 Feb 2007, Tony P wrote > In article <es36ic$3bp$1@grapevine.csail.mit.edu>, Garrett > Wollman says... [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Not Word documents. Not word-processing documents. Just > documents. Anythings else is misleadingly specific. If the boss really doesn't like the unadjectived "documents", how about "eDocuments" or "e-Docs"? SignatureCheers, Harvey Yes, you can assume there's a smiley added to that... Canadian and British English, indiscriminately mixed > "Type your entries in a word document and send them to us via email > or CD." [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > people understand word document to be any document created on a > computer." I'm not one of those people. You're going to look like an idiot if you put that on a web page. More common ways of phrasing it are 1. "in a Microsoft Word (R) document" 2. "in a text document" 3. "in a word processor document" The obvious problem with options 1 and 3 is that they're still ambiguous. For #1, the problem is that different versions of MS-Word aren't always compatible with one another, so it's not a very portable format. #2 is a lot clearer, since for anyone in the business it means a plain text document that does *not* contain word processor markup. And for #3, you're seriously stuck because there are so many different word processor formats on the market. > The fact is, a few paragraphs later you'll find the "acceptable > formats." These include Word, Works, Publisher, InDesign, > QuarkXPress, and a few others. Is that the actual wording used? If you want to send me an e-mail, I'm happy to submit a Works document. I presume that your supervisor won't mind that it's IBM Works rather than Microsoft Works. Mind you, I don't use Works much these days. I'd have to check to see whether it is still installed. Most of my "word documents", if such a term exists, are in OpenOffice (*.sxw) format. I can send you one of those, if you wish. It has the advantage of being portable across operating systems. If you specify only formats that are specific to MS-Windows software, you risk giving the impression of supporting restraint of trade. > I'm young - I've only had this job for 8 months. I don't want to > cause a stir or upset anyone. The marketing department (basically > one person - early 30s) has made it clear that she likes control and > she doesn't like to be told she is wrong. > > How can I elegantly explain that "word document" is incorrect? I understand the dilemma. If your supervisor thinks that she can do your job better than you can, then clearly she didn't need your skills in the first place, so it's dangerous to rock the boat. The way to solve this one is to get a potential customer to complain. Put out some sort of draft of the web page, and recruit someone else to write to your supervisor pointing out that they're worried about the company's apparent lack of competence, and expressing the hope that the confusing phrase "word document" is a mere slip of the pen and not an indication that the company doesn't know what it's doing. P.S. I didn't write this response until reading the whole thread, and I was greatly confused by what seemed to be examples of you talking to yourself. If you don't quote the relevant part of what you're responding to, and the person you're responding to is in nearly everyone's killfile, you get quite a bizarre effect. SignaturePeter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org Please note the changed e-mail and web addresses. The domain eepjm.newcastle.edu.au no longer exists, and I can no longer receive mail at my newcastle.edu.au addresses. The optusnet address could disappear at any time. On Feb 27, 5:56 pm, gonnabespa...@gmail.com wrote: > Greetings everyone - > "Type your entries in a word document and send them to us via email or > CD." I don't like MS Word and seldom use it although I do have a copy on my work machine. If I was reading this I might just assume that the company is only willing to accept documents in MS Word. If there was a rival company that would accept my document in another format, perhaps in OOo, or Postscript or PDF to name some I can easily produce, I'd just go to the next company. I don't have the time or desire to use Word unless it is essential. > The fact is, a few paragraphs later you'll find the "acceptable > formats." These include Word, Works, Publisher, InDesign, > QuarkXPress, and a few others. I'm already submitting the document in PDF to another company. I think Peter Moylan's suggestion of getting a customer to complain is the best one. WOW. Thank you very much. I was worried that this topic had spun out of control. I was very pleasantly surprised to see helpful responses. John, Peter, Harvey, RH, cybercypher, Tony, Garret, and Daniel: I can't thank you enough. I really appreciate your willingness to help. I was honestly seeking advice, and you all went far beyond my expectations. I'm a fan of simply using "document." We'll see if this issue is addressed again before we launch. Thanks again. > > "Type your entries in a word document and send them to us via email or > > CD." I would assume this was a misuse of Word(r) rather than a generic term. Since you say the acceptable formats are listed in the same document, I would suggest "Type your entries in one of the document formats listed below and send them to us via email or CD." Signaturejosh@phred.org is Joshua Putnam <http://www.phred.org/~josh/> Updated Infrared Photography Gallery: <http://www.phred.org/~josh/photo/ir.html> > I would assume this was a misuse of Word(r) rather than a generic term. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "Type your entries in one of the document formats listed below and send > them to us via email or CD." That was my original suggestion. However, it was "too long." |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.