[HN Gopher] Australian Government Style Manual
___________________________________________________________________
Australian Government Style Manual
Author : kimburgess
Score : 102 points
Date : 2023-06-24 09:54 UTC (13 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.stylemanual.gov.au)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.stylemanual.gov.au)
| [deleted]
| temptemptemp111 wrote:
| [dead]
| based2 wrote:
| https://commission.europa.eu/about-european-commission/depar...
|
| https://commission.europa.eu/resources-partners/translation-...
| based2 wrote:
| FR
|
| https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/contenu/menu/autour-de-la-loi...
|
| https://www.systeme-de-design.gouv.fr/
| aniijbod wrote:
| Les Patterson Culture Manual
| apricot wrote:
| I don't know about everyone else, but I find this kind of
| hypertext, with each section on its own page, infuriating to
| read. When you are done reading a section, there is no simple way
| to "turn the page" and go to the next section. You either have to
| scroll back to the beginning or use the back button.
|
| I understand that this is mostly a reference text, and few people
| will read it cover to cover, but I still think that "show me the
| next piece of contents" is an operation that should be supported
| natively.
| dottjt wrote:
| I think part of the reason for this is accessibility. If you're
| using a screen reader, then I think this approach makes sense.
| funshed wrote:
| Love it, a lot of inspiration from gov.uk in this.
| andrepd wrote:
| I prefer whatever manual produces these
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlUQMH19BkQ
| schappim wrote:
| I wonder if this will last longer than
| https://designsystem.gov.au/
| bongobingo1 wrote:
| Associated links:
|
| - code https://github.com/govau/design-system-site - sunset
| announcement
| https://web.archive.org/web/20210816211041/https://community...
| - reasoning (cant say I actually understand, beyond, the
| government is shifting focus)
| https://web.archive.org/web/20210624054249/https://www.legis...
|
| Seems it lasted from about 2017 to 2021. Shame.
| kimburgess wrote:
| It was first published in 1966, so seems probable. Thankfully
| prose and the core structure of language is slightly less
| volatile than the JS ecosystem.
| Maxious wrote:
| Many of folks who worked on that moved to work on
| https://design-system.agriculture.gov.au/
| https://github.com/steelthreads/agds-next
| ape4 wrote:
| Underlined hyperlinks are not that usual any more. But very
| clear.
| lmpdev wrote:
| My late father was well versed in this writing style - even
| though he never held a government role
|
| Journalists and particularly paper editors (he was deputy editor
| in chief of a famous magazine owned by the now defunct Federal
| Publishing) in the 80s and 90s.
|
| He and other editors had to adhere to it in overly government
| focused articles (not necessarily for propaganda, moreso for
| consistency)
|
| I truly believe there were no soft power intentions behind this
| sort of thing, it was difficult to find these particular
| resources pre-internet so they were essential pre late-90s
| barrysteve wrote:
| Some of this stuff is good, but golly gosh some isn't.
|
| Transitive verbs use the example, 'A director buys his lunch' to
| show that the action passes to the object.
|
| It makes no sense. Did the lunch buy itself?
|
| The page introduces an intransitive rule to cover up all the
| cases in English where subject-verb-noun generates sentences
| where there the noun ending is not involved in the verb.
|
| The guide overloads the meaning of the English word 'mood' to
| carry all the intended meaning of the speaker. You are literally
| ordered around by a 'mood' in this style guide.
|
| More loveless, heartless, unrecognizable clone work from the AU
| gov.
| GordonS wrote:
| At least as a Brit, the "lunch" example you provided makes
| perfect sense to me?
| defrost wrote:
| They're referring to the example here:
|
| https://www.stylemanual.gov.au/blog/transitive-and-
| intransit...
|
| 'buy' is the action, 'director' is the subject, 'lunch' is
| the object.
|
| <subject> <verbs> <object>
|
| is the typical transitive verb template, a transitive verb
| connects a subject and object (whereas other verbs don't
| require an object).
| cycomanic wrote:
| I still don't see what the issue is? Is the previous poster
| suggesting that transitive and intransitive verbs don't
| exist?
| elliottkember wrote:
| This guide did not invent the grammatical mood.
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_mood
| SeanLuke wrote:
| Australia is foolishly anti-Oxford comma.
|
| https://www.stylemanual.gov.au/grammar-punctuation-and-conve...
| cfcfcf wrote:
| Did you read this? It says minimize usage.
| [deleted]
| SeanLuke wrote:
| It says "restrict the use". And does not provide a
| qualification.
| stolen_biscuit wrote:
| > The Oxford comma can prevent ambiguity in complex
| sentence lists. For example, use the Oxford comma before
| the last item if you're using a defining phrase applicable
| only to that final item.
|
| > A defining phrase is essential to the meaning of the
| sentence. The following examples show how the Oxford comma
| can affect meaning, using the defining phrase 'for
| stockfeed'.
|
| Seems like it provides a clear cut framework for when to
| use it?
| xdennis wrote:
| [flagged]
| mnot wrote:
| [flagged]
| SturgeonsLaw wrote:
| It's natural to use they/them for any gender in ordinary
| English
|
| "your 2 o'clock appointment is here"
|
| "sorry I'm running a bit late, can you please ask them if they
| don't mind waiting 10 minutes"
| tomohawk wrote:
| [flagged]
| tsujamin wrote:
| I did a training course on this the other day - loved how
| passionate the trainer (who worked on the ASM) was about the
| correct application of quotes within quoted passages
| jen729w wrote:
| I find this an interesting choice.
|
| > Double quotation marks aren't Australian Government style.
| Use them only for quotations within quotations.
|
| My partner is a(n Australian) copy writer. She's converted me
| to the following rule:
|
| - If it's a direct quote -- some human uttered the words -- it
| goes in "double quotes".
|
| - Any other thing that is quote-like, but not words that an
| individual human actually said, goes in 'single quotes'.
| cookie_monsta wrote:
| Which is interesting because probably 99% of whatever gets
| air-quoted should be done with one finger per hand, not two.
| lotophage wrote:
| We need a style guide for hand gestures.
| SturgeonsLaw wrote:
| It really irks me how people "misuse" quotation marks
| kid64 wrote:
| (with the exception of a quote within a quote)
| JdeBP wrote:
| Eric Partridge ("You Have a Point There") disagrees. Single
| or double, quotation marks are inaccurate if the words are
| not strictly quoting.
|
| Before the age of widespread international computer-mediated
| communication, authorities generally agreed on a rule of
| starting with one and alternating to the other for quotations
| within quotations. Many agreeing that starting with single
| quotation marks was the U.K. rule and starting with double
| quotation marks was the U.S. rule; with the U.K. switching to
| double quotation marks for quotations within quotations and
| the U.S. switching to single.
|
| One U.K. authority that I have from 1985 describes U.K. use
| of double quotation marks in primary position as "fighting a
| rearguard action" in the U.K., with only _The Times_ sticking
| to it. Everyone else used single quotation marks primarily,
| back then.
|
| However, the influence of CMC has put a lot of pressure on
| the then U.K. habit. Today, after decades of Usenet, Fidonet,
| the World Wide Web, et al., the top articles on BBC News
| (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-66007017) and _The
| Guardian_
| (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/24/wagner-
| troops-...) use double quotation marks, and the pendulum has
| very much swung the other way, with the U.K. norm of the
| 1970s now being the rare exception.
|
| However, the rule of switching for quotations within
| quotations still holds, and headlines quite often still use
| single quotation marks, even though article bodies will use
| double ones for the same quotation. This latter is observably
| the case on the BBC News and _Guardian_ sites right now, to
| use the same examples.
| bloak wrote:
| You're absolutely right about British newspapers using
| double quotes nowadays, but British books still use single
| quotes, as far as I can tell.
|
| An interesting question to ask, and a harder one to answer
| is: what kind of quotation marks did people use in
| handwriting at different points in history? I'm not totally
| sure about this, but I think there's a long tradition of
| people in Britain using double quotation marks in
| hardwriting, in particular, for school. So I suspect that
| there is a long tradition of the choice of quotation mark
| being context-dependent. So using single marks in books but
| double marks in newspapers isn't as strange as it might
| seem.
| Tsiklon wrote:
| The layout looks rather like they've taken the UK's gov.uk setup
| and done their own thing with it. Excellent!
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-06-24 23:01 UTC)