Chris, I would successfully argue that the "universally understood, accepted and mandated expressions" is a bit wide and not at all in synch with reality. If it were universal, we would never be having these discussions.
Wednesday and still Cheery, Rob Schramm On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Chris Mason <chrisma...@belgacom.net> wrote: > Don > > We are not dealing with a language - that would be another campaign such as > getting rid of the stupid misuse of "issue" or "issues" for "problem". We > are > dealing with explaining technical matters where there is an opportunity for > ambiguity if we don't stick to universally understood, accepted and > mandated > expressions. > > Chris Mason > > On Mon, 2 May 2011 17:53:54 -0400, Don Leahy <don.le...@leacom.ca> > wrote: > > >Usage gives meaning. That's how languages evolve. Acronyms too, > >apparently. ;-) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO > Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html > -- Rob Schramm Senior Systems Engineer w: 513.305.6224 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
