Love it! You know I'm a sucker for cute titles. My book on graphs has absolutely zero names of any algorithms in the table of contents. Here's a brief list of some of the chapter titles:
- The lurker's labyrinth
- The major's new supercomputer
- Behind the enemy lines
- ...
Betcha you can't guess which algoritmos are they about?
Yes, and the disadvantage is that if someone is looking specifically for a topic, they won’t find it this way. This is in part why I often use a two-part title for narrative articles. It’s a compromise! Let’s say someone is curious to know whether I wrote about f-strings and scans the posts in my archive, they’d never guess just from the “narrative” title!
Love it! You know I'm a sucker for cute titles. My book on graphs has absolutely zero names of any algorithms in the table of contents. Here's a brief list of some of the chapter titles:
- The lurker's labyrinth
- The major's new supercomputer
- Behind the enemy lines
- ...
Betcha you can't guess which algoritmos are they about?
If a reader trusts the author, they don’t need to know what’s coming, they can just enjoy the ride.
Narrative technical writing is the future (and present)
That's a very good point. It feels safer to be playful when you already have somewhat of an audience.
Yes, and the disadvantage is that if someone is looking specifically for a topic, they won’t find it this way. This is in part why I often use a two-part title for narrative articles. It’s a compromise! Let’s say someone is curious to know whether I wrote about f-strings and scans the posts in my archive, they’d never guess just from the “narrative” title!
I totally get that for an independent article where someone new to your writing could land. That's why I take more risk with boo and chapter titles.