Talk:Know-how

Redirect
Thanks for helping. But unfortunately, I think that the redirection for "Know-how" is not appropriate. There is a huge difference between knowledge and know-how. In the first case, time is not taken into account. Knowledge is ... "to do right". In the second, time is crucial. Know-how (alias expertise) is ... "to do right (maybe not so right) and fast (speed matters)". Therefore I do not think that it is wise to redirect know-how towards (procedural) knowledge. A sentence on the past Know-how page gives the link to procedural knowledge page if a (soft) redirection is desired.

(Now a second reason which makes me uncomfortable with this redirection is that procedural knowledge is ambiguous to me: it is a tautology to speak of procedural knowledge if we only imply that time is needed to yield results; on the other hand if procedural implies a computer-based, programmed implementation of knowledge it is too reductive, we might than have to introduce other types of knowledge, such as structural knowledge, or human knowledge for example.) -- (User:Dessimoz|Dessimoz), 8:41, Nov 5, 2003 (UTC)

Disclosure agreements
The Section on disclosure agreements is very messy, and best omitted or given a distinct entry. GioCM GioCM (talk) 02:43, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Alternate spelling
Note that knowhow is a recognized alternative spelling (per sister publication Wiktionary), and given general trends in language, the usage will probably coalesce around the single word knowhow in the future (???). Thus I added this as an alternative at the beginning of the article. Zagraniczniak (talk) 10:33, 6 June 2018 (UTC)