From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Gregory Heytings Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: 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 Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2022 20:34:00 +0000 Message-ID: <920c42f33fc219879daf@heytings.org> References: <83h6zyye3f.fsf@gnu.org> <87ilkeu3r1.fsf@gmail.com> <87a65qty8a.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="11421"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Stefan Kangas , Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Robert Pluim Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 20 22:38:10 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1olcIp-0002gf-V7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 22:38:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1olcIo-0001W2-6V for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 16:38:06 -0400 Original-Received: from [::1] (helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1olcF1-0007YP-Oq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 16:34:11 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1olcEx-0007Ss-D2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 16:34:07 -0400 Original-Received: from heytings.org ([95.142.160.155]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1olcEv-0006Tz-PX; Thu, 20 Oct 2022 16:34:07 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heytings.org; s=20220101; t=1666298041; bh=vTupIbbJGCMsXCt0PyoCgdC4hAXFxAYph3cvNP+z7Hk=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:From; b=J2chLpaq3kCYK0coyLEoQuxcVOc2FGhgrSumyPVqc8+UH6gOTzURgCTJfKNEdrBDK Yc/zb6jYRT2lhDREc5AAIJHJ6c/Q8SFIA19JRvRIZxFwU0LZ8XkEQ/LHoFH1Be07ms nQ+upyxdJ7Ezi2/OfYH0BLHKd2DgLTV86hgqsssQ//zwTV3fba80q+Bn5urr40x3+w 3HkL9BkLoS1eSvmcZgMto4q9sg5nXLpkPkiTy/mOoE6cgR4WeNapuy/rDrmhju9tom cUdI7N8UvxazIIzkqSiMB2opUmOobWlbFDgmC7pWNDT47dX3t8JE51aachixiKKb6V iI1fYqbBnWEFQ== In-Reply-To: <87a65qty8a.fsf@gmail.com> Content-ID: <920c42f33f1b422ae12b@heytings.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=95.142.160.155; envelope-from=gregory@heytings.org; helo=heytings.org X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:298176 Archived-At: > > 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.