7

Throughout the months I have been reading Ac.SE I have come across questions where the context of the question in a way depends on some abbreviation which is not explicitly defined. I realise that some abbreviations have become common knowledge (e.g. PhD, CS..) but some others might be ambiguous to many.

In publications one is often required to "introduce" any abbreviation that recurs, and I suppose it would not be too much to expect the same here.

What do you think? Is there an "official policy" on this matter?

| |
12

If this ever happens just leave a comment. We don't have a policy for this, and I don't think we need one. If something confuses you, ask! That's what comments are for. We have quite an active community here; even if the poster doesn't address your concern, someone else likely will.

| |
  • I believe this is the right way to go. I wouldn't want a formal policy. There are already enough rules to follow. – aeismail Aug 17 '13 at 23:23
  • Either leave a comment, or edit the question/answer to spell out the abbreviation. – Chris Gregg Aug 19 '13 at 6:21
  • I'd vote for leaving a comment, so the user realises the abbreviation is not as general as he may have thought. I certainly learned to be more careful when it was pointed out to me. – Davidmh Dec 18 '15 at 11:04

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .