<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Grammar and Punctuation for the Web: What\&#8217;s Proper?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.contentious.com/2004/09/13/grammar-and-punctuation-for-the-web-whats-proper/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.contentious.com/2004/09/13/grammar-and-punctuation-for-the-web-whats-proper/</link>
	<description>Amy Gahran's news and musings on how we communicate in the online age.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 23:57:45 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Debra Broughton</title>
		<link>http://www.contentious.com/2004/09/13/grammar-and-punctuation-for-the-web-whats-proper/comment-page-1/#comment-10096</link>
		<dc:creator>Debra Broughton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Jan 2005 13:55:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-10096</guid>
		<description>Websites reach out to an international audience - and include many non-native English speakers. For this reason alone, all these rules make good sense. Choice of words is also important - plain English makes it easier to reach more readers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Websites reach out to an international audience - and include many non-native English speakers. For this reason alone, all these rules make good sense. Choice of words is also important - plain English makes it easier to reach more readers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Andrews</title>
		<link>http://www.contentious.com/2004/09/13/grammar-and-punctuation-for-the-web-whats-proper/comment-page-1/#comment-608</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Andrews</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Oct 2004 23:52:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-608</guid>
		<description>The discussion about use of capitalization has a historical ring.  In particular, I refer to the internet and the web.  My parents remember that when the telephone was being introduced it had capitals.  They also said the same happened with the following words: car, automobile, aeroplane, atomic bomb, television (still TV) phonogram, wireless, radio, vacuum cleaner, mixmaster, power-point (this also had discussion on powerpoint or power-point), electricity.
I think when a new medium or communication standard first breaks with the general public, it is given a capital because of its uniqueness.  Once the system becomes common and looses that, it reverts back to lowercase.  Therefore, those that have been using computers and the net for a long time (1974 in my case) do not see it as new, or a place, but as a tool like a refrigerator, or mobile phone, or a car.  So we could generalize (note generalize) and say that those who still use capitalized internet and web are late adopters of the technology or, use it less than the lowercase user.  I say generalize because there will be some that have been using the medium for just as long as I - if not longer (about 1964 for the 1st email) and still capitalize.
The point is that the rules are a reflection of common usage, and they change with what is common. The argument of a "geographical location" is not enough.  My study is too, so is my office, and although this statement can be considered fallacious, what is the defining characteristic that means web is upper case and study is not?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The discussion about use of capitalization has a historical ring.  In particular, I refer to the internet and the web.  My parents remember that when the telephone was being introduced it had capitals.  They also said the same happened with the following words: car, automobile, aeroplane, atomic bomb, television (still TV) phonogram, wireless, radio, vacuum cleaner, mixmaster, power-point (this also had discussion on powerpoint or power-point), electricity.<br />
I think when a new medium or communication standard first breaks with the general public, it is given a capital because of its uniqueness.  Once the system becomes common and looses that, it reverts back to lowercase.  Therefore, those that have been using computers and the net for a long time (1974 in my case) do not see it as new, or a place, but as a tool like a refrigerator, or mobile phone, or a car.  So we could generalize (note generalize) and say that those who still use capitalized internet and web are late adopters of the technology or, use it less than the lowercase user.  I say generalize because there will be some that have been using the medium for just as long as I - if not longer (about 1964 for the 1st email) and still capitalize.<br />
The point is that the rules are a reflection of common usage, and they change with what is common. The argument of a &#8220;geographical location&#8221; is not enough.  My study is too, so is my office, and although this statement can be considered fallacious, what is the defining characteristic that means web is upper case and study is not?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jenise Cook</title>
		<link>http://www.contentious.com/2004/09/13/grammar-and-punctuation-for-the-web-whats-proper/comment-page-1/#comment-570</link>
		<dc:creator>Jenise Cook</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2004 19:09:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-570</guid>
		<description>Tim Burners-Lee, the "father" of the WWW states that Web and Web site are most definitely written with an uppercase W. See his comments on &lt;a href="http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/FAQ.html#Spelling"&gt;FAQ on Spelling Web&lt;/a&gt;

World Wide Web is a "place" in cyberspace, and we use uppercase even for virtual locations.

And, yes, the Internet with an uppercase I. Why? Again, it is a "geographical location" in cyberspace.

It isn't arbitrary or according to whimsy. Plus, Microsoft's, Apple's, and Sun Microsystem's style guides support the above.

Yes, I am passionate about the above!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tim Burners-Lee, the &#8220;father&#8221; of the WWW states that Web and Web site are most definitely written with an uppercase W. See his comments on <a href="http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/FAQ.html#Spelling">FAQ on Spelling Web</a></p>
<p>World Wide Web is a &#8220;place&#8221; in cyberspace, and we use uppercase even for virtual locations.</p>
<p>And, yes, the Internet with an uppercase I. Why? Again, it is a &#8220;geographical location&#8221; in cyberspace.</p>
<p>It isn&#8217;t arbitrary or according to whimsy. Plus, Microsoft&#8217;s, Apple&#8217;s, and Sun Microsystem&#8217;s style guides support the above.</p>
<p>Yes, I am passionate about the above!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy Hoth</title>
		<link>http://www.contentious.com/2004/09/13/grammar-and-punctuation-for-the-web-whats-proper/comment-page-1/#comment-556</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy Hoth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Sep 2004 20:55:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-556</guid>
		<description>I was worried when I first started reading your article because I hold rigidly to grammar and punctuation rules. However, I discovered that you aren't really saying that a whole lot of things need to be changed. I think you have advocated some minor things, and that generally, as is evident in your writing, you hold true to most of the rules that most of us hold dear. I too think we need to have some rules written up for online writing, but changes from the norm should be presented with good evidence or reasons for the change. 

I disagree with your decision to not capitalize words like "Internet" or "the Web." I think that is the same as misspelling words, something that might also eventually happen if we, as someone has already said, continue the "slide down a slippery slope."

Once again, I must disagree with your opening paragraph and statement of "Not True!" You make it sound as if you are going to throw out all of the rules, when in fact, you have only suggested some minor changes. People who only give your reading a quick glance will not discover this, and will, in fact, assume that you are advocating a much more lienient approach to grammar. That will only give those who pay little attention to spelling and grammar rules an excuse to continue what they are doing instead of making an effort to do it right.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was worried when I first started reading your article because I hold rigidly to grammar and punctuation rules. However, I discovered that you aren&#8217;t really saying that a whole lot of things need to be changed. I think you have advocated some minor things, and that generally, as is evident in your writing, you hold true to most of the rules that most of us hold dear. I too think we need to have some rules written up for online writing, but changes from the norm should be presented with good evidence or reasons for the change. </p>
<p>I disagree with your decision to not capitalize words like &#8220;Internet&#8221; or &#8220;the Web.&#8221; I think that is the same as misspelling words, something that might also eventually happen if we, as someone has already said, continue the &#8220;slide down a slippery slope.&#8221;</p>
<p>Once again, I must disagree with your opening paragraph and statement of &#8220;Not True!&#8221; You make it sound as if you are going to throw out all of the rules, when in fact, you have only suggested some minor changes. People who only give your reading a quick glance will not discover this, and will, in fact, assume that you are advocating a much more lienient approach to grammar. That will only give those who pay little attention to spelling and grammar rules an excuse to continue what they are doing instead of making an effort to do it right.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff</title>
		<link>http://www.contentious.com/2004/09/13/grammar-and-punctuation-for-the-web-whats-proper/comment-page-1/#comment-527</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2004 10:05:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-527</guid>
		<description>Go for it Amy - rules are there to be broken!
I'm an elearning writer, so your thoughts resonate with my own experience and instincts.
Cheers :)
Jeff</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Go for it Amy - rules are there to be broken!<br />
I&#8217;m an elearning writer, so your thoughts resonate with my own experience and instincts.<br />
Cheers <img src='http://www.contentious.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
Jeff</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Teaching and Developing Online.</title>
		<link>http://www.contentious.com/2004/09/13/grammar-and-punctuation-for-the-web-whats-proper/comment-page-1/#comment-525</link>
		<dc:creator>Teaching and Developing Online.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Sep 2004 22:18:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-525</guid>
		<description>&lt;trackback /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Grammar and Punctuation for the Web: What’s Proper?&lt;/strong&gt;
Most of us were educated to believe that there is one “correct” (and fairly formal) version of English grammar and punctuation, and any deviation from that is mere sloppiness. Contentious » Grammar and Punctuation for the Web: Whatâ€™s Proper?...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<trackback /><strong>Grammar and Punctuation for the Web: What’s Proper?</strong><br />
Most of us were educated to believe that there is one “correct” (and fairly formal) version of English grammar and punctuation, and any deviation from that is mere sloppiness. Contentious » Grammar and Punctuation for the Web: Whatâ€™s Proper?&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rita Quackenbush</title>
		<link>http://www.contentious.com/2004/09/13/grammar-and-punctuation-for-the-web-whats-proper/comment-page-1/#comment-513</link>
		<dc:creator>Rita Quackenbush</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Sep 2004 14:12:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-513</guid>
		<description>Your comment at 5:20 clears up your intention somewhat, but the whole premise of "bending the rules" leads down a very slippery slope.  Use of proper gramatical rules needs more, and not less emphasis in an educational setting especially.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your comment at 5:20 clears up your intention somewhat, but the whole premise of &#8220;bending the rules&#8221; leads down a very slippery slope.  Use of proper gramatical rules needs more, and not less emphasis in an educational setting especially.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amy Gahran</title>
		<link>http://www.contentious.com/2004/09/13/grammar-and-punctuation-for-the-web-whats-proper/comment-page-1/#comment-511</link>
		<dc:creator>Amy Gahran</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Sep 2004 22:20:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-511</guid>
		<description>I realize that the concept of bending print-based grammatical/punctuation rules to enhance online communication is a controversial one. Well, this blog isn't called CONTENTIOUS for nothing, I suppose! :-) 

Seriously, though -- the whole point of language (including grammar and punctuation) is &lt;b&gt;communication&lt;/b&gt;. All I'm saying here is that due to the limitations and unique aspects of online media, some rules that work well in a print environment do not necessarily enhance communication in an online environment.

I am not saying that standard grammar and punctuation rules don't matter. I'm saying that they should be applied thoughtfully, in ways that are most appropriate for the method of communication (medium) being used. This is a point that should be considered by any individual or organization trying to make decisions about online content style. That's all.

- Amy Gahran
  Editor, CONTENTIOUS</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I realize that the concept of bending print-based grammatical/punctuation rules to enhance online communication is a controversial one. Well, this blog isn&#8217;t called CONTENTIOUS for nothing, I suppose! <img src='http://www.contentious.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Seriously, though &#8212; the whole point of language (including grammar and punctuation) is <b>communication</b>. All I&#8217;m saying here is that due to the limitations and unique aspects of online media, some rules that work well in a print environment do not necessarily enhance communication in an online environment.</p>
<p>I am not saying that standard grammar and punctuation rules don&#8217;t matter. I&#8217;m saying that they should be applied thoughtfully, in ways that are most appropriate for the method of communication (medium) being used. This is a point that should be considered by any individual or organization trying to make decisions about online content style. That&#8217;s all.</p>
<p>- Amy Gahran<br />
  Editor, CONTENTIOUS</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Tangney</title>
		<link>http://www.contentious.com/2004/09/13/grammar-and-punctuation-for-the-web-whats-proper/comment-page-1/#comment-510</link>
		<dc:creator>John Tangney</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Sep 2004 22:08:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-510</guid>
		<description>Sure, English is evolving... But the whole point of grammar rules is that they're rules. That is, they're a set of common conventions that help readers understand what the writer intended. Examples of miscommunicaton caused by incorrect punctuation abound.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sure, English is evolving&#8230; But the whole point of grammar rules is that they&#8217;re rules. That is, they&#8217;re a set of common conventions that help readers understand what the writer intended. Examples of miscommunicaton caused by incorrect punctuation abound.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Daidone</title>
		<link>http://www.contentious.com/2004/09/13/grammar-and-punctuation-for-the-web-whats-proper/comment-page-1/#comment-509</link>
		<dc:creator>John Daidone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Sep 2004 19:26:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-509</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the info.  I agree that simplicity is best.  But I do have issue with your views on capitalization, especially when it comes to web page headers, navigation items, and other labels.  We have a policy of "sentence case" at Deloitte (i.e., only cap the first word and proper nouns), but it's not always easy to distinguish what's a proper noun and what isn't.  In a large organization such as this, I find that folks tend to cap most terms as a way of indicating importance.  So what happens is you have some content managers using sentence case, and others not, which creates inconsistency.  I personally prefer initial capping all terms in page headers, nav items, etc., except for prepositions, conjunctions, and articles because it's just easier for people to know what to do.  And I'm all for consistency!  Just my opinion ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the info.  I agree that simplicity is best.  But I do have issue with your views on capitalization, especially when it comes to web page headers, navigation items, and other labels.  We have a policy of &#8220;sentence case&#8221; at Deloitte (i.e., only cap the first word and proper nouns), but it&#8217;s not always easy to distinguish what&#8217;s a proper noun and what isn&#8217;t.  In a large organization such as this, I find that folks tend to cap most terms as a way of indicating importance.  So what happens is you have some content managers using sentence case, and others not, which creates inconsistency.  I personally prefer initial capping all terms in page headers, nav items, etc., except for prepositions, conjunctions, and articles because it&#8217;s just easier for people to know what to do.  And I&#8217;m all for consistency!  Just my opinion &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
