Re: *** Why is rewriting bad ?

Article View: misc.writing

Article #1297

#1297

From: Thomas Beagle
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 20:35

19 lines
1110 bytes

In article <77124@apple.apple.COM> chuq@Apple.COM (Crow's Friend Timmy) writes:
>
>I know, I know. Injecting facts into a USENET argument is worth two demerits.

Yes, but you're just as bad as a Nazi. :-)

Now this thread has officially reached rock-bottom, perhaps we could
move on?

ObWriting : When writing a manual, do you index as you go (and risk
all sorts of incompatibilities) or do you index after the bulk of the
manual is written?

-- 
    Thomas Beagle | thomas@datamark.co.nz           Work: 64 4 233 8186
 Technical Writer | thomas@cavebbs.welly.gen.nz     Home: 64 4 499 3832
   Wellington, NZ | Yes, I do have long ears, a black nose, and a tail.

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1993Jan21.203546.45088@datamark.co.nz>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!comp.vuw.ac.nz!ferrari.datamark.co.nz!thomas

References: <1993Jan19.172314.23411@emr1.emr.ca> <ak09852@pro-harold.cts.com> <77124@apple.apple.COM>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Newsgroups: misc.writing
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!comp.vuw.ac.nz!ferrari.datamark.co.nz!thomas
From: thomas@datamark.co.nz (Thomas Beagle)
Subject: Re: *** Why is rewriting bad ?
Message-ID: <1993Jan21.203546.45088@datamark.co.nz>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 20:35:46 GMT
References: <1993Jan19.172314.23411@emr1.emr.ca> <ak09852@pro-harold.cts.com> <77124@apple.apple.COM>
Organization: Datamark International Ltd.
Lines: 19

Reply to Parent Message