'as-a-Service' entry contains an error

[daobrien]

The very last entry contains two issues:

Avoid use of an acronym if it could stand for more than one term in a single asset. for example, if you are writing content that discusses both Cloud-as-a-Service and Containers-as-a-Service.

• IMO it would be better to write "Avoid using an acronym..."
• The "for" in "for example" needs to be capped.

[daobrien]

At the same time as addressing this issue, please add a target to the 'as-a-Service' heading so that I can link to it from Vale.

[julian-cable]

Also, add the following "as-a-Service" terms, all of which have appeared in recent training content:

• AIaaS (Artificial Intelligence-as-a-Service)
• GPUaaS (Graphics Processing Units-as-a-Service)
• IaaS (Infrastructure-as-a-Service)

[daobrien]

Also, add the following "as-a-Service" terms, all of which have appeared in recent training content:

• AIaaS (Articial Intelligence-as-a-Service)
• GPUaaS (Graphics Processing Units-as-a-Service)
• IaaS (Infrastructure-as-a-Service)

I'd be disinclined to add every example that we come across. We have general guidance for how to write these, and we have further guidance for exceptions (overlaps), but I don't think including all examples or variations adds any value. E.g., SaaS is not listed either.

[julian-cable]

@daobrien I have made various updates here for the next release.
From your first entry here, the punctuation before "for example" should have been a comma and I have fixed it.

This is the link to the "as-a-Service" entry:
https://stylepedia.net/style/#as-a-service

In that entry, "SaaS" was present but not in alphabetical sequence. I have now reordered all the listed items alphabetically.

I think it's important to include an AI-related term, and have added one, although I agree about not needing to add all possible terms.