How do people write online? It really shouldn't come to surprise anyone that, on 
a very basic level, writing online is much the same as writing in print. Could
an argument be made that writing has evolved certain standards,
guidelines, grammatical rules, and that these rules are followed online as
they would be in print because there are reasons for them? They exist for
a purpose?

The only conclusive evidence seems to be that people do read differently
online, and this has a variety of reasons, many of which are related to
the technology available to read, monitors and eyestrain, but some of  
which seem to follow naturally from the medium of online communication, or
HTML.

But just because they read differently doesn't mean they're not
reading. In fact, here is what Patrick J. Lynch and Sarah Horton of Yale
Medical School have to say about this subject in their book "Web Style  
Guide":

"Writing for the Web is a new medium with no definitive guide or set of
standards. One popular school of thought holds that Web readers want to
see as little text as possible and are opposed to long documents and the
physical act of scrolling. This may have been true when the Web was a
technological novelty and most Web "surfers" were looking for a free form,
associative experience with the variety of content on the Internet. Now
people are becoming impatient with the slogging through masses of
insubstantial material to get what they are seeking: information. Clear,
concise, complete, accurate information."

This "popular school of thought" mentioned above is not entirely dead, but I
would modify its description slightly. It would not seem that these web designers
are opposed to the act of scrolling, but rather, prefer to break their text up into 
digestable "chunks", often the size of one screen. This "school" or camp also
seems invested in writing less in a publication meant for the web than in a 
corresponding print publication. Jakob Nielsen, PJ Schemenaur, and Jonathan 
Fox, all of Sun Microsystems are co-authors of a piece entitled "Writing for the 
Web" hosted on the Sun website. Their piece goes as far as to say that writing
for the web should have "fifty percent of the word count of its paper equivalent."

Perhaps a third opinion, or an extension of this last, is that online writing is 
similar in style and function to that of newspaper writing.


STYLE: A FUNCTION OF AUDIENCE

        On the web, as with conventional publication, having an intended audience drives 
style. The main difference between web-publication and print publication is the amount 
of effort involved, whether measured in timeframe, money, or whatever. It is simply 
easier to publish something on the web than it is to publish something in print. Because 
of this ease of publication, nearly anyone who has ever wanted to convey some piece of 
information now has the capacity to do so, even if the only person interested in said 
information is the person's mother.
        Much has been made of this fact that anyone can now publish on the web, and 
indeed, it can be argued that everything posted on the Internet is in some way 
"published". However, there is a distinction that can be made between online pages that 
are intentionally aimed to establish themselves as a "publication," and those pages that are 
less invested in the idea of an audience.
        Writing for publication on the web is really not as different from writing for 
publication in print media as you might think. For the most part, writing style remains 
the same in print publication and online "for-publication" pages. The same rules of 
writing apply to both media. The same conventions of grammar and conventionally 
accepted writing standards apply. 
        Examples of the type of webpages intended for online publication are obvious. 
Almost all webpages actually do fit this category. The exceptions to this rule are the 
pages whose authors do not intend for a mass audience to view their page. Some of these 
pages are in many ways like "zines" in that they do not usually adhere (with as much 
rigidity) to conventional writing standards. There are of course gray areas. Not all 
publications are MLA style perfect or zine-style sloppy. The levels of editing and 
proofreading are dependent on many factors, just as in print publication. Another 
possible reason for more sloppy web pages resides in the ease of correction. Web 
pages can be "fixed" when an error is found. When a book contains an error, usually 
the whole printing edition contains that error, and correction is not an option.


WORDS: INTERNET JARGON

        In the book Wired Style: Principles of English Usage in the Digital Age, at least 
two chapters are devoted to one way that the net does in some ways differ from print 
publication, but this is not a difference in kind, it is what the editors of that text call 
"jargon." Referred to in other contexts as lingo, jargon is basically meant to represent the 
terms that are specific to a particular field, in this case, the context of the Internet. It 
is decidedly true that not all persons using the internet understand internet "jargon", 
however, a significant number do, and a significant number of web publications assume 
that their readers both understand and use these terms. 
        It is probably helpful to note that, like style, jargon use is a function of audience. 
A publication aimed at the general public (like an online newspaper) is less likely to use 
heavy technical jargon, whereas a publication aimed at computer programmers must use 
technical jargon to convey the gist of it's meaning. In most online publications you will 
find a medium amount of jargon use fostered by the assumption that their viewers are 
familiar with many not-too-technical internet-related terms.
        Use of internet jargon helps to foster a sense of online community. This is 
especially true of chat-specific jargon that has since "leaked" out into the various other 
aspects of online writing, including publication, and, (to an admittedly lesser degree) has 
even begun to permeate print publication. Emoticons, or smileys are a particularly potent 
example of this kind of jargon. (For a thorough description of emoticons, see A Smile on 
the Web, at http://www.comline.gr/~vareco/smileys.htm.)
        Examples of internet jargon are so far reaching and prevalent that every major 
internet directory or index (Yahoo, Netscape, Lycos) has a listing of sites that compose 
lists of internet terms. Many words common in online communities are used to describe 
phenomena unique to the internet itself, like the terms "browser" and "email," which have 
become so popular that even people who do not use electronic communication are familiar 
with the terms. 
        It is useful to note that abbreviation and acronym are especially prevalent in 
internet jargon. Words like "tech" (short for technology) and "net" (originally short for 
internet) are as commonplace as acronyms like "FTP" (for File Transfer Protocol) and 
"gif" (short for Graphics Interchange Format).
        Wired is only one example of a print magazine that has taken this internet jargon 
to the paper presses. Other magazines to do so include Yahoo: Internet Life, PC 
Magazine, and Telephony, just to name a few of the really big ones.  


FORM: HEADLINES, LISTS, KEYWORDS, OH MY!

        There do seem to be some emerging conventions or standards for the form of 
online writing--that is, the way it is presented on the digital page. All of the conventions 
found in the headline above can be found on almost any website that you care to visit. 
There is even some evidence that these strategies make reading (and in particular reading 
on a computer screen) easier or more effective.
        Headlines or headings, captions, subheadings, page titles, are all quite standard, 
and are, again, found almost everywhere. It is interesting to note that the idea of a page-
title (or window title) is actually built into most (if not all) web browsers. This brings up 
the chicken vs. egg question: Which came first? The "headline" tag, (h1, h2, h3 and so on), 
is also built into HTML, and serves to format the text in a larger font with bold face. 
Section titles are also very common in web design. Of course titles and section titles are 
not unique to online media, but have evolved in the conversion from print use in that they 
are especially common in the web medium. Often, pages will contain several titles with 
only short lists of information under each heading. These seem to be performing the same 
function, in terms of information presentation, as do lists.
        Lists are, of course, another web phenomenon not uncommon outside of the web 
environment, however users of the web will note that lists have become almost the 
"norm" for information presentation on the web. Whereas in RL (real life) lists are often 
limited in function to throw-away uses like grocery lists, and to-do lists, with the 
possible exception of poetry.
        It is again interesting to note that HTML (the language that online writing is 
"written" in) has several built-in or ready-to-use functions that make forming lists 
particularly easy in web-design. The tag that begins a list, "UL" stands for "unnumbered 
list" and there is a corresponding, (but less commonly used) "NL" for "numbered list." 
Each of these tags have built-in methods of formatting the list medium in various ways.
        The concept of keywords is the most radical of the three concepts in this section. 
Keywords are, again, not a new or unique idea. In fact, some of the possible uses of the 
concept (i.e. bold and italics) existed previously in print form. However, on the web, 
there are seemingly infinite ways to highlight a keyword. In HTML it is entirely possible 
(and common practice) to change the colors of the written text, as often as every letter if 
desired. Bold, Italics, and underlining area all quite common and "easy" effects in HTML.
        The surprising frequency of the use of keywords is perhaps attributable to 
another way that keywords are used, (which we will discuss later,) that of the 
hypertextual link. Links serve both to highlight the words that make up the link, (by 
changing the color of the text) and also to underline the text. Both formats combined call 
attention to the possible "linking" to another page or further information on the same 
page, (presumably on the subject of, or related in some other way to the highlighted 
words themselves).


WORD OVER SENTENCE: 

        The web seems to be invested in keeping things short. When you're creating a 
website with lots of content, and you want to make it all easily accessible right from the 
beginning, you have to think about methods of distribution for that content. This means 
thinking about menus and data structures. It also means simplifying your user interface, 
which often makes sentences too long to fit the bill. This is not true universally, but it 
does seem to be a major trend in interface design. Menus are not made up of complete 
sentences. Neither are URLs (or Universal Resource Locators--the location markers for 
every document that makes up the internet).
        There has been lots of talk in various papers and books (Stephen Johnson comes 
to mind, among others) about links, and methods of choosing which words to use as links. 
Anyone who uses the web frequently will have had some experience with bad links. For 
example, you click on a link that occurs on someone's name, expecting to get more 
information about that person, when what it really takes you to is a listing of their books 
at Amazon.com. This is not all that uncommon, at least partially because the nature of 
linking in general is so ambiguous. 

	There are, of course, exceptions to every blanket statement. And if there
is one defining characteristic of online writing, it is that it is
prolific, so there are naturally lots of exceptions.



Possible outline structure:

Style is Audience
		ease of publication
		audience issue
		grammar
		zines & error correction
Words: Internet Jargon
		Specificity
		Audience
		Culture--smileys
		Abbreviations and aconyms
		print
Form, Oh My!
		headlines -- title & h1 tags
		lists -- ul & nl tags
		keywords -- i, u, b, & a tags
Newspaper Angle -- Newspaper Metaphor
		length
		concisity
		layout or design angle
		relevance of self promotion (?)
			search engines & meta tags
Physical (or not so) Medium
		windows -- presentation
			design as opposed to text only
			"fitting" it all on the screen
			layered environment
		links -- fluidity
			a changing environment
				URL - importance of location & the info that conveys
				updating and link checking as it relates to reliability
			instant citations
			keyword issue (interconnectedness of writing-see previous section)
Investment in word over sentence...
		links, lists, keywords, etc. (reiteration)
		menus -- buttons
		sacrifice of clarity for length and potency
		name issue or uniqueness issue