Anitha Abraham
Being a part of the Style Committee and holding meetings to standardize terms can sometimes be an eye-opener. This is because meetings can change from placidity to turbulence on matters of style. Now let me give you’ll a peek into decision-making and our problem areas on style issues.
You can choose to ignore, learn from our style issues, or enlighten me on how we could do better with them. Typically, our approach to dealing with terms is given below:
- Consider usage recommended in our standard references. For instance, The American Heritage Dictionary for general terms, the IBM Dictionary of Computing Terms or The Microsoft Computer Dictionary for IT Terms, select EDA sites for technical terms, The Chicago Manual of Style for general language guidelines, and so on.
- Also, consider common usage within the company, as well as within the industry that we operate in. (Optional: Consult experts in language, IT, or EDA if required.)
- Then, decide on the term that we want to include in our style guide.
When deciding on a term to include in the style guide, the meetings were smooth going and decisions were quick to make in cases where the term recommended in our standard reference matched the common usage within the company or the industry. However at times, the going was not smooth in meetings and trouble brewed when making decisions. Let’s consider these two minor cases.
- Case 1: Should the abbreviation for “Not Applicable” be standardized as “n/a”, “N/A”,” NA”, “n.a.”, or “N.A.”?
- Case 2: Should we update the standard SI unit of measurement from “micron” to “micrometer”?
In these two cases, differences of opinion arose because there was no match between the standard reference and the common usage. Standardizing the use of these terms might seem trivial, but our style committee had senior writers and editors with strong opinions, and it sometimes became a battle of wills.
Case 1: Should the abbreviation for “Not Applicable” be “n/a”, “N/A”, “NA”, “n.a.”, or “N.A.”?
The abbreviations for “Not Applicable” in our standard reference The American Heritage Dictionary were “NA” and “n/a” at the time. While all flavors of the term as indicated above were used on different websites on the Internet, it was hard to find a consistent or common usage. But “N/A” seemed the most popular option. Opinions on the style committee were divided between “N/A” and “NA.” Writers with a minimalist bent of mind preferred “NA” and made a strident call for its standardization. However in the end, the style committee decided to standardize the use of “N/A” because of its fairly widespread usage and the fact that the abbreviation was not really an initialism. Also, “N/A” was recommended by The American Heritage Abbreviations Dictionary. The decision was not easy, and it made several people on the committee unhappy.
Case 2: Should we update the standard SI unit of measurement from “micron” to “micrometer”?
Here we had an issue because the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology), which was our standard reference for SI units of measurement had made an update on the matter. At one point, it seemed like the NIST had recommended “micron” and this term had gained widespread usage. Almost all literature and technical documents within the company and the industry used “micron”. However, the NIST later changed its recommendation from “micron” to “micrometer.” A few senior writers on the committee who felt it was important to keep in sync with standards wanted the term “micron” to be changed to “micrometer” in the style guide. Unfortunately, the overwhelming use of the term “micron” both within the company and the industry prompted the committee to decide against a change to the existing standard term “micron.” Purists on the style committee felt let down at the decision.
I’ve mulled and chewed over the matter and gleaned that perhaps given the terms and the time we could spend on these matters, it was the best decisions that we made. It’s a matter of style, and perhaps there may be those who think that we lacked good sense or taste. Sigh! But these terms are not key terms that are frequently used, and so we can rest a little easy.
I’ve used simple examples and scenarios to show that it can be a roller coaster ride on a style committee. Terminologists perhaps will concur that standardizing terms can take time and mean trouble sometimes.