Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • State Suggested Answer
  • Replies 21 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 422 subscribers
  • Views 3403 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Related

Use of Acronyms and Initialisms in discussions

jw0752

I am wondering if there is any merit in having a convention for the use of acronyms and initialisms in our discussions? I have been working in electronics for the last 50 plus years but I have not been able to keep up totally with the frontiers or diversity of this science. I have to admit that many times, as I read a description or explanation written by one of the more up-to-date members, I do not understand what they are talking about. The problem is not the ordinary words associated with electronics but rather the PID, TTH, PMBD, ETC. While being able to communicate with such initialisms adds a sense of in-group it is certain to frighten off some of the aspiring beginners as well as the old guys (me). I would propose that when using the Initialism for the first time in a discussion we put it down written out one time first. For example: (We must communicate effectively) WMCE. If "not" WMCE then we are wasting our time. Anyone know if there is a dictionary of electronic initialisms?

Parents
  • 0

    Hi John,

     

    Wow, you're dedicated, to have compiled this list : )

     

    It's good that you bring this up.

    I too agree, it's always good practice to see the full expansion at least the first time, and then abbreviations can be acceptable in the rest of the article in question. However, I guess a few are generally accepted, such as V for volt since it is a unit. Hard to know what to do with those.

    There is a school of thought that any two-letter abbreviations are better always expanded throughout the article, rather than only expanding at the first mention of it. So, for example NO and NC should always be expanded to normally open and normally closed, and NO and NC should not appear in an article according to that principle. I don't always follow it 100%, but it's a good guideline and common-sense can be used.

  • 0 in reply to shabaz

    Hi Shabaz  By the way congrats on your great interview. It is really interesting to learn more about the people behind the posts. I realized I was going over board with the single letter entries but once one is started it is hard to know where to draw the line so I threw them in. The one that push me over the edge and into action was the FPGA. I could not figure it out and had to do some research. John Beetem is correct, I still do not know what it is but at least now I can put the words to the letters. It sounds interesting and I will have to budget some time to learn a little more. Thanks again for your feedback.

    John

Reply
  • 0 in reply to shabaz

    Hi Shabaz  By the way congrats on your great interview. It is really interesting to learn more about the people behind the posts. I realized I was going over board with the single letter entries but once one is started it is hard to know where to draw the line so I threw them in. The one that push me over the edge and into action was the FPGA. I could not figure it out and had to do some research. John Beetem is correct, I still do not know what it is but at least now I can put the words to the letters. It sounds interesting and I will have to budget some time to learn a little more. Thanks again for your feedback.

    John

Children
No Data