Suggestion for future releases of Office

[MuzikJunky]

Hi. I was proofreading a friend's Master's thesis who is a
native-English speaker but not a native-English WRITER, and there were
many problems with grammar, punctuation, and usage. One of the major
problems was that he would define a term, give it an acronym, and then
use the SAME acronym for an entirely different term several pages
later. It would be really helpful that, in future versions of Word,
there would be an acronym manager--something that could be used to
register acronyms and make sure they were being used for all
occurances of a term for which they are being registered within a
document so that all usage of a particular term is consistent. What do
you think? Peace.

 

[Paul Berkowitz]

Hi. I was proofreading a friend's Master's thesis who is a
native-English speaker but not a native-English WRITER, and there were
many problems with grammar, punctuation, and usage. One of the major
problems was that he would define a term, give it an acronym, and then
use the SAME acronym for an entirely different term several pages
later. It would be really helpful that, in future versions of Word,
there would be an acronym manager--something that could be used to
register acronyms and make sure they were being used for all
occurances of a term for which they are being registered within a
document so that all usage of a particular term is consistent. What do
you think? Peace.

Maybe tell him to take an English writing course instead, and learn to use
his brain? For starters, you could tell him to create an Acronym Register -
entering the acronyms he stumbles into - and check it every time he wants to
create another one? Frankly, I think you'll find that people like this don't
always care care about being accurate. He might have to find out the hard
way. Then he might consider hiring you as his editor.

 

[Jim Gordon MVP]

Hi MuzikJunky,

It sounds like Paul got up on the wrong side of bed today.

Actually, Word already has the feature you requested. It's easy, too.

Go to the Tools menu and choose Autocorrect. On the Autocorrect tab type
in what an acronym stands for. Let's say you want to display TIAT
whenever "This is a test" (without quotation marks) appears in a
document, then you type "This is a test" into field labeld "Replace" in
the Autocorrect dialog box. On the right side type TIAT in the "With"
field, then click the ADD button.

If you have another acronym for "This is a top" (no quotation marks)
that also needs to be displayed as TIAT just fill in the appropriate
places and click ADD.

Now Word will correctly change both "This is a test" and "This is a top"
to TIAT.

Does this solution work for you?

-Jim

 

[Paul Berkowitz]

No. Jim. He wants some method to prevent, or at least alert, his lazy-minded
friend from trying to use the same acronym for two different meanings. What
you're suggesting would do the opposite, except it completely misunderstands
the question.

If I'm reading you correctly, you're providing a way for both "This is a
test" and "This is a top", if either is typed in, to be replaced by "TIAT".
But his friend never types in either "This is a test" OR "This is a top"
(except perhaps the first time each). What he does is type in "TIAT" and
expects the reader to know that it means "This is a test" except when it
means "This is a top". So there's no way for the reader to know which one is
meant. That's because the dumb friend has completely forgotten that he has
already used "TIAT" to mean "This is a test" when a few pages later he
suddenly starts using it to mean "This is a top".

What MuzikJunky wants is for Word o be smarter than his friend, and to
_prevent_ him from using "TIAT" from meaning more than one thing. I suppose
that if he were to take the time to do the opposite of what you advised, and
enter TIAT on the _left_ side of AutoCorrect and "This is a test" on the
right side. Now when he types TIAT in a document, "This is a test" will
show up in a yellow tooltip. So he can press return if he wants it to expand
to the full "This is a test" entry, or ignore it otherwise, and _hopefully_
will be smart enough to type out the full "This is a top" instead of using
the acronym. It ought o be a reminder to him that he has already used the
acronym to mean something else. But people like that friend usually will
just go ahead and use the acronym for both meanings anyway, I'm afraid. He
may well just ignore the tooltip in both cases. Or not bother taking the
time to enter it in AutoCorrect in the first place. It's worth suggesting
it, I guess. I think you'll find that he probably will need an editor,
however.



--
Paul Berkowitz
MVP MacOffice
Entourage FAQ Page: <http://www.entourage.mvps.org/faq/index.html>
AppleScripts for Entourage: <http://macscripter.net/scriptbuilders/>

Please "Reply To Newsgroup" to reply to this message. Emails will be
ignored.

PLEASE always state which version of Microsoft Office you are using -
**2004**, X or 2001. It's often impossible to answer your questions
otherwise.

 

[Daiya Mitchell]

I too kinda thought that was the writer's responsibility....

I have taken to keeping separate lists of things I need to check at final
editing--e.g., consistent spelling of proper names, reminder to run Find &
Replace on all the newspaper names that need to be italicized--to tell me
what to go back and check before turning in the final. That may be the best
solution. Edit | Find would certainly help one doublecheck that acronym use
was correct, when the basic writing is finished. (same as Paul's Acronym
Register, really) This task *could* probably be automated, for all I know
someone offers a plug-in that does it.

AutoCorrect could help, but sometimes you want to use the acronym instead of
spelling something out. <rant>However, if it is possible to use an acronym
twice for different concepts, perhaps the readers will not understand it
either, and it should not be used. If one is writing in a second language,
one has to work harder--e.g., check your paper more carefully, finish in
time to have people edit it... That's why writing in a foreign language is
difficult.</rant>

Although...Huh? I'm just curious to know how that works out. The other way round
seems somewhat logical, but not that...

Interestingly, I think I have seen a couple of requests for this on the
Windows side. Of course, people on the Windows side seem to think a Word
newsgroup exists to tell one how to phrase a letter of condolence on a
death. MS has blurred the line with all those templates they offer,
although in fact they haven't really crossed over to offering pre-made
content (as far as I can tell, I don't use those templates), but the
confusion is somewhat understandable.

<rant>However, anytime you want Word to edit your doc for you, you are
asking for trouble. Word is not an editor. Computers cannot edit. Editing
is arguably more difficult than writing. Of course, in America in the 21st
century, many people have no concept of what editing is.</rant>

The sad thing is, since MS is focused on the business customer and
businesses use acronyms so much, this might actually get added to Word
someday...

Now when he types TIAT in a document, "This is a test" will
show up in a yellow tooltip.

That's AutoComplete, just by the way. AutoCorrect doesn't bother with
tooltips, just sparkly blue lines in Word 2004.

 

[JE McGimpsey]

No. Jim. He wants some method to prevent, or at least alert, his lazy-minded
friend from trying to use the same acronym for two different meanings.

Gee, Paul, I'd guess you've never had to write reports for DoD, USAAFES,
NAVMILPERSCOM (NMPC), COMSUBLANT or DOE...

I have often had to produce 50 page documents with 3 entire pages of
acronyms and abbreviations (technically, an abbreviation is only an
acronym if it makes up a word, or is at least pronounceable as one -
e.g., LOCA but not LCC), all used liberally throughout the document.
Often, the reports seem to have at least one abbreviation per sentence.
I usually tape the list to my wall when writing/editing reports.

I can see the value of having, within that context, a mechanism to keep
track of which abbreviations are used, to alert me that when I use the
abbreviation LLWDF, thinking "Low-Level Waste Demonstration Facility",
that I've already used that abbreviation for "Low-Level Waste Disposal
Facility". Both are the (only!) acceptable abbreviations for my client,
but they can cause confusion if the context isn't obvious.

I could see it being *especially* useful for keeping track of acronym
changes. For instance, I used PNL for Pacific Northwest Laboratory for
years. It switched to PNNL (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory). I
*could* use an autocorrect to change PNL to PNNL, but then I couldn't
use PNL for anything else.

I don't think that the idea is lazy at all...

 

[Jean-Pierre Bollen]

Huh? I'm just curious to know how that works out. The other way round
seems somewhat logical, but not that...

I see this happening with English families living around us in France:
their kids learn perfect English at home, but since they go to French
schools they learn to write in French and tend to make many errors in
their written English.

If they do their whole schooling it will take them a lot of effort
(either a couple of years within an English schooling system, or courses
and attention as an adult) to acquire the same eloquence in their
written English.

Jean-Pierre (native dutch speaker in france ...)

 

[Paul Berkowitz]

Gee, Paul, I'd guess you've never had to write reports for DoD, USAAFES,
NAVMILPERSCOM (NMPC), COMSUBLANT or DOE...

OK. I retract my characterizations - forget that. Learning from Daiya's
correction of my last suggestion, here's what I have in mind:

Why not enter TIAT on the _left_ side of AutoCorrect and "This is a test" on
the right side. Now when he types TIAT in a document, "This is a test" will
appear. Then press cmd-z, or click the blue underline, to put it back to
TIAT. (Of course if you're typing quickly you might miss that.) If you
trained yourself to never used an abbreviation without first entering it in
AutoCorrect list, the AutoCorrect list would become your Abbreviations
Directory. When you decided you'd like to enter TIAT for "This is a top",
you'd discover it there already and would stop yourself. With only one entry
per abbreviation, the worst that could happen would be that quick typing
night produce the full name instead of the acronym - not so terrible.

--
Paul Berkowitz
MVP MacOffice
Entourage FAQ Page: <http://www.entourage.mvps.org/faq/index.html>
AppleScripts for Entourage: <http://macscripter.net/scriptbuilders/>

Please "Reply To Newsgroup" to reply to this message. Emails will be
ignored.

PLEASE always state which version of Microsoft Office you are using -
**2004**, X or 2001. It's often impossible to answer your questions
otherwise.

 

[JE McGimpsey]

With only one entry per abbreviation, the worst that could happen
would be that quick typing night produce the full name instead of the
acronym - not so terrible.

That might work for some. For me, it wouldn't work very well, because I
rarely look at the screen when I'm typing narrative.

And it can be "so terrible" if the acronym expands - especially if it's
the wrong expansion! Besides, many of my clients' specifications don't
allow for that - they want the expanded form used once only.

 

[Paul Berkowitz]

That might work for some. For me, it wouldn't work very well, because I
rarely look at the screen when I'm typing narrative.

And it can be "so terrible" if the acronym expands - especially if it's
the wrong expansion!

I don't understand - how could it be the wrong expansion if there's only one
expansion? (the purpose of the exercise). The whole idea is to only use this
scheme when you want to restrict yourself to one meaning per abbreviation.

Besides, many of my clients' specifications don't
allow for that - they want the expanded form used once only.

I can see that. So how exactly do you see an automated Abbreviation
Directory working then? If it can't be automatic. then it means just
maintaining a list yourself and checking every time - exactly as you do now.
And people who can't do it reliably for themselves will still need an
editor.

I've noticed that when you uncheck "Replace text as you type" in the
AutoCorrect window, you get no function at all. It's either totally
automatic (which can lead to problems if you don't look at the page as you
type), or nothing. Maybe a good feature request would be to have a third
option "Show expansion in tooltip" as I first imagined. With this option
typing the abbreviation would display the expansion in a tooltip so you can
confirm what the abbreviation means and not use it for a second meaning. Of
course you'll only see the tooltip if you watch the page, but at least it
won't replace the abbreviation. I suppose another option could provide sound
feedback for tooltips - a bell rinds to alert you to look up and notice.

Or do you have a better idea? I can't imagine what else you or MusikJunky
would expect in an automated version. A non-automated version is just doing
what you do now - maintain your own list and keep checking it. What else?
Thorough people will do well, others need editors.

You keep knocking down everything I suggest, so I'd appreciate knowing what
you'd have in mind instead.

--
Paul Berkowitz
MVP MacOffice
Entourage FAQ Page: <http://www.entourage.mvps.org/faq/index.html>
AppleScripts for Entourage: <http://macscripter.net/scriptbuilders/>

Please "Reply To Newsgroup" to reply to this message. Emails will be
ignored.

PLEASE always state which version of Microsoft Office you are using -
**2004**, X or 2001. It's often impossible to answer your questions
otherwise.

 

[Daiya Mitchell]

native-English speaker but not a native-English WRITER

I see this happening with English families living around us in France:
their kids learn perfect English at home, but since they go to French
schools they learn to write in French and tend to make many errors in
their written English.

Ah, thanks so much. My thinking was too parochial, couldn't come up with
that scenario.
DM

 

[Daiya Mitchell]

I can see the value of having, within that context, a mechanism to keep
track of which abbreviations are used, to alert me that when I use the
abbreviation LLWDF, thinking "Low-Level Waste Demonstration Facility",
that I've already used that abbreviation for "Low-Level Waste Disposal
Facility"

The version of the request I saw on the Windows side was for a mechanism to
ensure that the first time an acronym was used, it was spelled out in full
and explained. And perhaps also to create the "table of acronyms" to
accompany the paper, don't quite remember.

Except I think your feature, JE, would drive you crazy, because Word would
not know what you are using it for, all it could do is flag it. I guess it
could beep every time you used LLWD and pop up a dialog saying "you have
used this to mean XXX, does it still mean XXX," but if it didn't do it every
time it would be useless. I suppose the smarttag dealios could do it,
instead of a dialog, but then very easy to ignore. I don't quite see it
working in an "as you type" fashion.

Perhaps what is needed is a separate grammar setting for after the fact
checking--each time Grammar check finds a word in all caps, to flag it the
first time it appears, and every time it appears remind you what you set it
to mean and confirm that. Grammar check could refer to an Acronym Register
as Spellcheck refers to a custom dictionary. Although, really, why
complicate grammar check--how difficult would it be to program a separate
acronym check that finds words in all caps, on the first occurrence asks
"what does this mean?", reminds you to explain it, and on all further
occurrences asks "does this still mean XXX?" But that's only a slight
improvement over keeping your own list and using Find.

DM

 

[JE McGimpsey]

Except I think your feature, JE, would drive you crazy, because Word would
not know what you are using it for, all it could do is flag it. I guess it
could beep every time you used LLWD and pop up a dialog saying "you have
used this to mean XXX, does it still mean XXX," but if it didn't do it every
time it would be useless. I suppose the smarttag dealios could do it,
instead of a dialog, but then very easy to ignore. I don't quite see it
working in an "as you type" fashion.

I wasn't postulating a mechanism, nor had I thought it out extensively.
Without cogitating too hard, I expect I'd be happy with an option to
have Word beep and throw a dialog asking for the definition up whenever
a new all-caps (more than one-letter) word was detected, allowing one to
build an abbreviation list, along with placing an automatic tooltip with
the expansion for old abbreviations. That way, if I thought I was
creating a new abbreviation and the dialog didn't pop up, I'd know the
abbreviation was already in use.

As long as I'm getting that, I'd probably want the ability to create an
automatic index of acronyms and capitalized abbreviations.

I agree that anything more obtrusive would probably get in the way of,
rather than enhance, productivity.

 

[JE McGimpsey]

I don't understand - how could it be the wrong expansion if there's only one
expansion? (the purpose of the exercise). The whole idea is to only use this
scheme when you want to restrict yourself to one meaning per abbreviation.

Let's say I enter LLWDF and "Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility" in
autocorrect. In that context, I should then spell out "Low-Level Waste
Demonstration Facility".

Suppose, though, that after having slept, I typed LLWDF thinking
"Demonstration", failed to notice the suggestion with "Disposal", and it
was then expanded to "Disposal". I'd have an incorrect statement created
by an automatic process. Not good.

 

[JE McGimpsey]

You keep knocking down everything I suggest, so I'd appreciate knowing what
you'd have in mind instead.

See my message to Daiya.

Anything that would be obtrusive enough to stop me from typing in order
to check an acronym would likely not be used *by me*, since I usually
stare off into space while I'm typing.

However, something that automatically associated a tooltip text with an
acronym would probably be useful for me.

 

[Jim Gordon MVP]

Hi Paul et al,

Actually, by explaining the autocorrect feature I was trying to use a
back-door approach to show Muzikjunky how difficult it would be to deal
with the logic of multiple meanings for the same acronym. Autocorrect
allows only one autocomplete possibility for any given entry on the left
side. I was hoping Muzikjunky would try my suggestion and then try the
reverse to see what happens. OK - so maybe that wasn't a good plan.

But I am fascinated by the number of replies and various approaches to
Muzikjunky's question.

Many factors enter into what kind of automation, if any, that would be
appropriate. It drove Muzikjunky bonkers as he proofread his friend's
document that one acronym could have two meanings. Yet every day we use
words that have multiple meanings. We take cues from context, position
in the sentence, etc to decide upon the meaning. So multiple meanings
for a single acronym may not necessarily be always a bad thing depending
upon the document.

In a Master's thesis, the proper form would would be to use the complete
name of the term at the first instance along with the abbreviation. From
then on the abbreviation could be used within the paper. It would be a
bad thing (abiguous) in a thesis to define a different term later on
that used the same abbreviation. So Muzikjunky's analysis is correct.
This is a problem and the author needs to be alerted that a correction
is needed.

But what automation within Word might have helped this author? Is it
possible or desirable to have Word automatically pick up on abbreviations?

What would word have to look for? Try this sentence:
What it would take to have a Table of Abbreviations, TOA?

Word would have to check every sentence as it is typed for a comma, a
space and for matching upper case letters to the words immediately
preceeding the comma and ignore the final punctuation.

Of course, a lot of folks ignore articles and prepositions in
abbreviations, so in my example Table of Abbreviations could also be
abbreviated TA, so Word would have to inquire about which form to use.

And not everyone follows proper grammer using commas. It's common usage
to see abbreviations in parenthesis as well, so Word would have to
figure out that a Table of Abbreviations (TOA) or (TA) might also need
to be added to Word's internal table of abbreviations.

Later in the same document I want to make a new abbreviation. Example:
Teachers of Accomplishment, TOAs, ought to be recognized.

So Word would have to figure out (using a plural form, no less) that an
attempt to use TOA with a new definition was being attempted. What would
be the desired behavior for Word?

Should World halt and throw up a dialog? "You seem to be attempting to
use TOA to mean two different things: 'Table of Abbreviations' and
'Teachers of Accomplishment.' Would you like to use TEOA for 'Teachers
of Accomplishment'?" Some possible choices as buttons in the dialog box:
Yes.
No, use TOA for both terms and drive your readers crazy.
Maybe.
Repeat the question.
Don't ask questions like this again because I don't understand.

How is Word to figure out and deal with abbreviations like:
Extensible Markup Language, XML
Windows Experience, XP
Excel, XL
PowerPoint, PPT

My conclusion is there is no set of rules that could be devised for Word
to use that would reliably determine when an acronym was being deployed.

Then we have John's situation where he has a boatload of abbreviations
that he needs to type carefully, but not necessarily define in a formal
way for first use within a document. His audience already is familiar
with the acronyms. But John would like to have the full meanings of the
acronyms readily available to his readers, perhaps using a tool-tip. The
trouble with using ToolTips for this purpose is that the user interface
already uses them for comments. I can't think of anything automated that
would help John.

-Jim

 

[JE McGimpsey]

My conclusion is there is no set of rules that could be devised for Word
to use that would reliably determine when an acronym was being deployed.

The best that I could come up with was detection of multi-character
all-caps words, though your example of adding a lowercase s could be
accommodated. When a new one is detected, the user is given the option
to add an Abbreviation Object to a collection. This object would have
two new properities: the Abbreviation property and the Expansion
property.

When a subsequent abbreviation is detected and it matches an
abbreviation property of an abbreviation object within the collection, a
reference to that object is applied to the range.

While I expect a heuristic could be developed for guessing what an
abbreviation refers to when first encountered, I wasn't assuming that
Word would necessarily guess - rather throw up a dialog that says "I
detected the first use of this multi-character, all caps word - would
you like to place it in the abbreviations collection?"

This wouldn't prevent inadvertent duplication of abbreviations, which
may be a fatal flaw. But the user would have at least a negative
indicator - if I was using TOA for what I thought was a new acronym, and
Word didn't flag it as such, it would indicate that the abbreviation was
already in use.

Having the instantiation use such a new object would also allow for
manual, or better, automated entry of abbreviations. It would be great
to be able to generate a new document that could inherit an abbreviation
collection from its template or another document.

As far as the difficulty of scanning the words, Word already this with
autocorrect, so I don't see it as being anything radically different in
the real-time interface.

As far as the tooltip goes - you're right, I wouldn't want it to be
confused with Comments. But a precedent exists: hyperlinks have
"screentips" that pop up, but are accessible via the hyperlink object,
not the comment object.