Page 3 of 4
Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 1:36 pm
by MTP
I don't think there would be much benefit in just hacking to pieces the CoO doc. Even if at worst it was a doc uploaded to Google docs and shared with everyone, then we could at least edit or add to the online version. I think it would be better, however, to create a proper Wiki and then put the link to it in the resources area.
Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 2:50 pm
by Izopter
I think it would be better, however, to create a proper Wiki and then put the link to it in the resources area.
MTP, How?
I just mugged up a starter to get the interest sounded out.
But if it can be accessed as an open document then the 'strays' will keep mucking it up!
Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 6:39 pm
by Ugly Stick
But if it can be accessed as an open document then the 'strays' will keep mucking it up!
Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 11:36 pm
by MTP
Izopter wrote:I think it would be better, however, to create a proper Wiki and then put the link to it in the resources area.
MTP, How?
I just mugged up a starter to get the interest sounded out.
But if it can be accessed as an open document then the 'strays' will keep mucking it up!
It then comes down to decision:
Either you want a proper Wiki that is openly editable, or you want an approved list, where people can post suggestions to a editor/moderator for inclusion, but only the editor/moderator can make the changes.
A proper Wiki may be more tricky, there are scripts that theOptom could use, but it would mean designing and integrating that. This may be too much of a burden upon his time. Alternatively someone could just create a Wiki page on optometric abbreviations in one of the many Wiki sites and we link to that.
The worry about someone mucking it up is addressed by Wikipedia here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: ... _and_abuse
Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 11:46 pm
by Izopter
I had in mind exactly your option 1.
Since - surprise - I have more time than most I could help.
But interest in having one is different from interest to
a) provide samples to get a full-ish initial list
b) get contributions continuing (though it should quickly reach a plateau esp. with the College's list alongside).
This later stage has been reached almost instantly before
a) is completed
so
b) is a lost cause.
Unless others now convince me differently.
Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 12:48 am
by Humspoff
After a couple of posts today, I think we need some translation for some of the medical terms!
Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 9:23 pm
by Izopter
Like these: real ones used by the Senior Consultant Ophthalmologist - old school! - in my training days - splashed right across the full first sheet of notes...
L5CN - 2/A
Lacking in 5th cortical neurones (optionaly, in extremis) two per acre!
for, as we now say, those with learning difficulties.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
PS I have just seen sight of a proposal which is very promising on this Abbreviation theme.....tbc!
Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 12:18 am
by theOptom
One has been set up here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optometric_Abbrevations
It will also be put in the resources section. Thanks.
Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 12:20 am
by Humspoff
Errrrrr, who has done that??????
Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 12:34 am
by MTP
Izopter wrote:I think it would be better, however, to create a proper Wiki and then put the link to it in the resources area.
MTP, How?
I just mugged up a starter to get the interest sounded out.
But if it can be accessed as an open document then the 'strays' will keep mucking it up!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: ... _and_abuse
I think the idea is that it is relatively self-policing and as all the document amendments are stored and viewable in the document history you can always go back.
theOptom, in the resources sticky, do you want to put a wee explanation of what it is. I know it's kind of obvious from the URL, but it may make it look a wee bit
more obvious!
Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 12:35 am
by Humspoff
Was it you Bear?????
Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 7:04 pm
by Izopter
yip, it well Bears the hallmarks...
(er..a spelling mistake in the link - a missing 'i' !
)
....en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optometric_Abbrev i ations
I have also altered the title of this thread - it is now referring viewers to the Resources section.
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:29 pm
by an radharcmahstoir
Dispensting-
LTB- Length to Bend
AOR- at own risk
FOH- Frame on hold
OFHW- own frame here with
OFTF- own frame to follow
STET- stationary own lens i.e change other lens
NC- no change
Vx- Varifocal
Bf- Bifocals
Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 1:04 am
by con_con
PIA
Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 1:09 am
by Humspoff
con_con wrote:PIA
Along with the one we cant use....
TAPS