Re: feature/eglot-texi-manual 4725c123f3 2/5: ; eglot.texi: Fix typos and minor inconsistenciesfeature/eglot-texi-manual 4725c123f3 2/5: ; eglot.texi: Fix typos and minor inconsistencies

[Gregory Heytings <gregory@heytings.org>]

>
> if the existing text is not clearly incorrect, don't change it, even if 
> there's some guide that says it's 'wrong'. 'which' vs 'that' falls in 
> that camp
>

IMHO, it doesn't.  And, FWIW, here's what the CMOS says:

that; which.  These are both relative pronouns.  In polished American 
prose, _that_ is used restrictively to narrow a category or identify a 
particular item being talked about {any building that is taller must be 
outside the state}; _which_ is used nonrestrictively---not to narrow a 
class or identify a particular item but to add something about an item 
already identified {alongside the officer trotted a toy poodle, which is 
hardly a typical police dog}.  _Which_ is best used restrictively only 
when it is preceded by a preposition {the situation in which we find 
ourselves}. Nonrestrictively, it is almost always preceded by a comma, a 
parenthesis, or a dash. (In British English, writers and editors seldom 
observe the distinction between the two words.)  Is it a useful 
distinction?  Yes.  The language inarguably benefits from having a 
terminological as well as a punctuational means of telling a restrictive 
from a nonrestrictive relative pronoun.