{"id":22181,"date":"2016-07-14T08:05:21","date_gmt":"2016-07-14T15:05:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/franklycurious.com\/wp\/?p=22181"},"modified":"2016-07-08T21:56:36","modified_gmt":"2016-07-09T04:56:36","slug":"frontend-vs-front-end-vs-front-end","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/franklycurious.com\/wp\/2016\/07\/14\/frontend-vs-front-end-vs-front-end\/","title":{"rendered":"Frontend vs Front-End vs Front End"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"front-end\"I got an email message from one of my writers about our style guide, “Frontend vs front-end vs front end?” I love that because writers tend not to pay attention to style guides. And the truth is that while writers should have a decent knowledge of the style guide, it is really<\/em> for the use of the editor. The better the writer knows the style guide, the less work there is for the editor. But this was a really good question. It wasn’t in the style guide, and I had to decide.<\/p>\n

Frontend?!<\/h2>\n

The problem with dealing with these variations of “front-end” is that the style guide already dictates “backend.” So the obvious answer is “frontend,” right? Well, no. It just didn’t feel right. Consistency is a great thing if you can get it. But it doesn’t trump readability. And when I see “frontend,” I do not see “front-end.” I see “fron-tend.” And I don’t want to make the reader have to figure out anything.<\/p>\n

What’s more, I think that backend is a more common phrase. Now this would probably not be the case if I were editing for a automotive website. But I work for a website about websites. And we mostly talk about the “backend.” The front-end is more or less a given — the default. It’s what your audience sees and all you ultimately care about.<\/p>\n

Front End?!<\/h2>\n

Of course, I could have gone with “front end.” But that’s a problem. It works. It’s clear. But it isn’t quite right. The front-end is a single thing. The two words go together. But I should note that around here, I often omit hyphens that I would include if I were being more careful. But who has the time to be careful around here? I don’t even have time to be careful when I’m working there. I could easily spend twice the time I do editing.<\/p>\n

But this is one thing a style guide is for. Given that I’ve written this article, I will remember. But often, when editing, I will only remember that I have<\/em> made a decision about “frontend” vs “front-end” vs “front end.” I won’t remember what it is. The style guide allows an editor to fret over such matters just once.<\/p>\n

Remembering “Front-End”<\/h2>\n

When I first got the message, I immediately thought, “Well, it’s ‘backend.'” That’s one I run into a lot so I have it memorized. And so I really<\/em> wanted to use “frontend.” It’s just easier. You don’t have to remember anything. And that has always been my approach to grammar and style: make it simple. It seems most of the grammar articles I’ve written here make that point. I have banished blonde<\/a> and annunciate<\/a>. But alas, I have introduced another inconsistency into my style guide.<\/p>\n

But it is necessary. I often say that style guides are arbitrary. And indeed they are! But they are not completely<\/em> arbitrary. Their ultimate purpose is to make communicating with the reader as easy as possible. It’s useful to look back at texts from the Elizabethan era — before English spelling was standardized. It is really<\/em> hard to read! You have to sound out each word. It’s madness!<\/p>\n

Inconsistencies<\/h2>\n

So it must be “front-end” and “backend” — at least for now. I could, of course, go the other way: turn “backend” into “back-end.” It’s a thought. And the great thing is that in the electronic age, all it would take is one SQL query to fix all the previous style. But I won’t. Because I like a clean style. It is USA, not U.S.A. It is Dr Knowitall, not Dr. Knowitall. If a hyphen is unnecessary, it must go, even if it makes my work (and that of my writers) slightly harder.<\/p>\n

I know! I can hear Mozart’s Concerto No 3 playing on the world’s smallest violin.<\/p>\n