> From: Trevor Farrant [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 15 July 2004 13:48
> ... I would like to ask [Stephen] how you would define whether
> something is a standard term, e.g., MAD is commonly used, Markus
> was interested in it and yet you were able to answer his query.
A standard term is defined by a Standard, but as the old joke states, the great thing is that there are so many standards to choose between. It's a hobbyhorse of mine that you should *never* assume that a word or phrase used in a technical sense will be understood outside its context. Many years ago I searched for citations of SPSS (meaning the software) and was intrigued to find some 30 alternative uses as an acronym. An acronym in a thesis had gone out of use in the department concerned within five years of the thesis being written. All of which is a verbose introduction to a request that acronyms should *always* be defined when used in messages unless the communication is to a colleague with known shared knowledge. For an example where even then you might fail, see the recent exchanges on this list about the definition of CV (Coefficient of Variation).
A linked comment is to promote the use of LaTeX for technical report writing, rather than the convenient but slapdash visual word processors. The specific feature here is that in LaTeX one can define macros (I *know* you can in Word, but it's a different idea), and it is easy to provide a pattern so that any acronym is defined as a macro containing the name and expansion. The action of the macro is then to insert the expansion on the first (or first, second etc) use and put only the acronym subsequently. It could also, for example, put the acronym in a special font, generate an index reference for each use, cross-reference to the first use, or generate a Glossary of used acronyms. A macro that was not defined would be flagged, so new or mistyped acronyms are detected. All this is possible just by training the writer to type \SPSS rather than SPSS. You're \MAD not to use it.
Allan Reese
Personal opinion, not a statement of CEFAS policy
|