3 ms·

>For my using OP in my post, well, here on Hacker News (HN), that is a standard abbreviation And for AWS, IAM is a standard abbreviation. That's my point. >So

>For my using OP in my post, well, here on Hacker News (HN), that is a standard abbreviation And for AWS, IAM is a standard abbreviation. That's my point. >Sorry, clearly that's just not good enough since the first use of the acronym did not have the link. I've already acknowledged that, but one minor error - putting the hyperlink on the second use of a term that you could locate in 5 seconds in Google is hardly going to make the whole thing unintelligible is it? >Did I say that my concern was good technical writing? You did. And you've backed it up with pretty poor non-technical writing and a single complaint about the lack of hyperlink on the first occurrence of a single acronym that 99% of those reading an AWS technical blog would already know.

graycat 11y ago
> And for AWS, IAM is a standard abbreviation. That's my point. That point fails: HN has a much larger and more broad audience than AWS. Still, actually, HN should define OP -- I still don't have a good source to know what it means and have been only guessing. That AWS has a smaller audience than HN does not excuse omitting definitions. Again you are assuming that readers of that OP blog are "99%" experienced AWS users, and that's not good. If the blog were only for such users, then I should say so. That I could look around to unwind the acronym, later in the text, elsewhere on the page, on some other pages of the blog, elsewhere at AWS, at Google, doesn't excuse anything. I mentioned some authors with some writing that is astoundingly technical, and there terms are defined as I described. Computing is awash in bad technical writing; I should be torqued at it, and I am; one of the worst problems is poor handling of technical terminology, jargon, and acronyms; the blog post was an example: Either (A) define the acronyms on or before first usage or warn the audience that there are prerequisites. Simple.
- prof_hobart 11y ago
  >Still, actually, HN should define OP -- I still don't have a good source to know what it means and have been only guessing. So it's HN's fault, not yours, that you didn't define a term that you chose to use? And you're using a term that you don't know what it means? > I should be torqued at it, and I am What is "torqued" meant to mean in this context? I know what torque means, but it makes no sense when applied to this sentence.

graycat 11y ago

> And for AWS, IAM is a standard abbreviation. That's my point. That point fails: HN has a much larger and more broad audience than AWS. Still, actually, HN should define OP -- I still don't have a good source to know what it means and have been only guessing. That AWS has a smaller audience than HN does not excuse omitting definitions. Again you are assuming that readers of that OP blog are "99%" experienced AWS users, and that's not good. If the blog were only for such users, then I should say so. That I could look around to unwind the acronym, later in the text, elsewhere on the page, on some other pages of the blog, elsewhere at AWS, at Google, doesn't excuse anything. I mentioned some authors with some writing that is astoundingly technical, and there terms are defined as I described. Computing is awash in bad technical writing; I should be torqued at it, and I am; one of the worst problems is poor handling of technical terminology, jargon, and acronyms; the blog post was an example: Either (A) define the acronyms on or before first usage or warn the audience that there are prerequisites. Simple.

prof_hobart 11y ago
>Still, actually, HN should define OP -- I still don't have a good source to know what it means and have been only guessing. So it's HN's fault, not yours, that you didn't define a term that you chose to use? And you're using a term that you don't know what it means? > I should be torqued at it, and I am What is "torqued" meant to mean in this context? I know what torque means, but it makes no sense when applied to this sentence.