Stay organized with collections
Save and categorize content based on your preferences.
This document discusses some of the principles and philosophy behind this
style guide.
Intended purpose
This style guide codifies and records our style decisions and describes our
house style. The guide doesn't claim to be objectively correct.
This guide is not intended to do the following:
Provide an industry documentation standard.
Compete with other well-known style guides.
Replace another style guide that you already follow.
Provide a complete set of basic writing guidelines.
Provide legal advice. For legal advice, consult a lawyer.
Explanation of reasons for guidelines
We generally don't explain the reasoning behind most of our guidelines. We
have a couple of reasons for that:
Many of our decisions are driven by accessibility, localization,
globalization, and ease of understanding. Giving those reasons as explanations
everywhere they apply would be repetitive.
Often, a given guideline is one good option among several; in those cases,
we sometimes just chose one option for consistency.
Too much explanation can clutter up a page. Readers most often want a
brief answer to a specific question, rather than a detailed explanation.
That said, we recognize that it's sometimes useful to know why we made a
given choice, so we've started to include occasional explanations in the What's new page.
[null,null,["Last updated 2024-10-15 UTC."],[[["\u003cp\u003eThis style guide documents the preferred writing style for this organization's content, focusing on internal consistency rather than setting industry standards.\u003c/p\u003e\n"],["\u003cp\u003eIt does not aim to be a comprehensive writing guide or replace existing style guides, primarily focusing on stylistic choices rather than basic writing principles.\u003c/p\u003e\n"],["\u003cp\u003eWhile it prioritizes conciseness over detailed explanations, the guide occasionally provides rationale for specific choices, particularly concerning accessibility and localization.\u003c/p\u003e\n"],["\u003cp\u003eUsers are expected to act ethically and legally regarding documentation, regardless of whether they have read the guidelines.\u003c/p\u003e\n"],["\u003cp\u003eThis guide is subject to change and doesn't limit the organization's ability to modify its documentation.\u003c/p\u003e\n"]]],["This style guide records house style decisions, acknowledging it's not objectively correct. It's not an industry standard, nor does it replace other style guides or provide basic writing or legal advice. While most guidelines lack explanations to avoid repetition and clutter, they are driven by accessibility, localization, globalization, and consistency. The guide doesn't limit changes Google can make and users are responsible for acting ethically and lawfully, even if guidelines are not read. Occasional explanations are available on the \"What's new\" page.\n"],null,["# Philosophy of this style guide\n\nThis document discusses some of the principles and philosophy behind this\nstyle guide.\n\nIntended purpose\n----------------\n\nThis style guide codifies and records our style decisions and describes our\nhouse style. The guide doesn't claim to be objectively correct.\n\nThis guide is *not* intended to do the following:\n\n- Provide an industry documentation standard.\n- Compete with other well-known style guides.\n- Replace another style guide that you already follow.\n- Provide a complete set of basic writing guidelines.\n- Provide legal advice. For legal advice, consult a lawyer.\n\n| **Note**: Two disclaimers:\n|\n| - The guidance in this style guide doesn't limit the changes that Google can make to its documentation.\n| - If you don't read a given guideline, then you are still responsible for behaving ethically and lawfully with regard to documentation.\n\nExplanation of reasons for guidelines\n-------------------------------------\n\nWe generally don't explain the reasoning behind most of our guidelines. We\nhave a couple of reasons for that:\n\n- Many of our decisions are driven by accessibility, localization, globalization, and ease of understanding. Giving those reasons as explanations everywhere they apply would be repetitive.\n- Often, a given guideline is one good option among several; in those cases, we sometimes just chose one option for consistency.\n- Too much explanation can clutter up a page. Readers most often want a brief answer to a specific question, rather than a detailed explanation.\n\nThat said, we recognize that it's sometimes useful to know why we made a\ngiven choice, so we've started to include occasional explanations in the [What's new](/style/whats-new) page."]]
