Re: [vox] [OT] ISO's vs ISOs

[Micah Cowan <micahMAPS@cowan.name>]

Peter Jay Salzman writes:
 > micah, i have to admit.  i like your attitude about the subject.
 > 
 > frankly, i think jim made an *awfully* persuasive argument.  i found
 > myself agreeing with everything he said.
 > 
 > i think using the apostrophe to mark the end of the acronym makes total
 > sense.  to use jim's example, but with nicole's way of writing it:
 > 
 >    Mind your Ps and Qs.
 > 
 > what exactly should i be minding?  should i be minding a "P" or should i
 > be minding a "Ps"?  nicole's method doesn't say; it's ambiguous.  the
 > apostrophe isn't just syntactic sugar.  it serves a purpose.

It can be ambiguous the other way, too - as it can be confused with
the possessive. However, there's no help for that - and I do seem to
remember coming to the conclusion that using the apostrophes looked
better to me too, though I seem to have forgotten why...

Another thing that comes into play on this matter, is whether to use
periods in acronyms. I have a book (away on loan at the moment, forgot
the author), "Elements of Typographic Style", which gives the
rule-of-thumb that you should use periods when the acronym is read
letter-by-letter, and drop them when it is pronounced.  So now it's:
T.V.s vs. T.V.'s vs. TVs vs. TV's :)

Note that while I have *huge* awe and respect for the book mentioned
above, there are several impractical rules given in it which cannot be
taken as law. But they make great rules-of-thumb. In the case of this
particulr rule, though, I don't think any modern technical documents
use the periods.

-Micah
_______________________________________________
vox mailing list
vox@lists.lugod.org
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox