Design Communication: Speaking the Language, pt. 2

Last time we looked at several tactics for using the language of our industry to communicate effectively to those executing our designs. There we focused on the advantages of carefully-chosen jargon, the danger using imprecise terminology, and the strength of using the same language as your readers. Let’s now focus on brevity. Here’s a brief on keeping it brief.

The field of computer science has long sought effective methods of compression–means of efficiently transporting data either without data loss (“lossless”) or with minimal or acceptable amounts of data loss (“lossy). You’ve seen ZIP files, mpeg-3, PNG, H.264; these are containers that compress the data for transport so that the file size can be reduced.

Typically compression methods trade off the amount of compression with data loss. Lossless compression returns all the data but generally with less reduction of file size. Reducing the file size significantly comes at the cost of losing some data, which in some files such as audio, video or images, can be acceptable.

Engineering has a compressed used of language. It is characterized by not using articles, skipping modal auxiliaries and incorporating other shorthand. Instead of writing, “The chain hoist shall be capable of lifting no less than 500 pounds,” an engineer might write, “Chain hoist to lift min. 500#.” This language convention was developed when drafting was done by hand; time per letter really mattered.

While the above example might be considered lossless, one could also experience lossy compression by taking engineering speak too far. If you wrote, “Chain hoist 500#,” would that mean the intended “500 pound minimum capacity?” “Capacity up to 500#?” “The chain hoist itself weights 500#?”

Compressing our language can condense our documentation, but over compression can lose meaning. While print is relatively cheap, denser text allows more to land on the page, alleviating the need to flip pages as often. Readers in this environment can quickly gather the meaning without having to parse large blocks of text.

While wit may not be the end goal of our documentation, brevity in words and letters can be valuable. What could be more brief than abbreviations, acronyms and initialisms? We save time on writing out full phrases, we land less clutter on the page and the written word mimics the more natural spoken word.

In the template document I use, among the boiler plate notes is a list of the shorthand I use. Writing out, “owner-furnished equipment,” in every instance not only costs time to write but visually distracts from the more important information of the equipment itself. The letters OFE tagged onto a device immediately communicates its status. Such combinations of letters abound: ETR, R&R, NIC, Min., O.C., AFF etc.

While this shorthand can save us valuable real estate on the page, using too much can actually be a hindrance to communication. Some practical advice, don’t use abbreviations without defining them within the document and limit how many you use. The list in my template thus represents 100% I actually use, although it practically covers about 75% of the abbreviations that I could use. To get the next 15-20% of instances I could use would surely expand the list to be 3 or 4 times as long. If you’re interested in further reading, check out Zipf’s Law, which applies to the logarithmic distribution of lexical frequency within languages.

Abbreviations, acronyms and initialisms are convenient shorthand, but don’t go overboard. Zipf’s law applies here as well, as expanding our vocabulary of abbreviations mines rarer and less familiar veins. My curated list contains more commonly-used and commonly-understood abbreviations. Several are on the bubble, such as “UNO” for “Unless Noted Otherwise.” While I find myself using that phrase often enough, in my review of documents within the industry it does not appear commonly enough for me to have confidence that it meets the second criteria of common understanding. Sure, the information would be available in the drawing set, but at the expense of frustrating the reader who has to flip back to the cover sheets to find the notes with the definitions.

Brevity does not serve its own purpose. Brevity serves efficiency. Brevity compacts information into a more manageable footprint. Brevity links to pre-established communication norms within the field. But conciseness must not come at the expense of clarity. Every word you save must be earned.