bug#28790: [PATCH] Replaced "which see" with "q.v.".

[Nick Helm <nick@tenpoint.co.nz>]

On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 at 14:22:50 -0700, John Williams wrote:

> This patch fixes a grammar issue that's been bugging me for a while.
> Full description from the patch:
>
> While it may seem strange to replace an English phrase with a
> relatively obscure Latin abbreviation, there are a number of
> advantages.  As someone whose first language is English, I've never
> seen "which see" used anywhere else the way it is in Emacs.  It looks
> totally ungrammatical to me, and I found it quite confusing when I
> first encountered it.

Please don't do this.

I agree that the phrase "which see" may appear awkward to many fluent
English readers, but I don't think correctness is at issue here. "Which
see" and qv are recommended and discouraged in equal measure by the
style manuals I have here, but they all agree that both usages are
correct.

More importantly though, I think "which see" is a more accessible form
for those who are less familiar with written English. Awkwardness aside,
the writer's meaning should be fairly obvious to most readers without
reaching for the dictionary. In a sense, "which see" is an intuitively
shortened version of "which you should see for more information".

"Quod vide" (qv) is arguably more conventional, but for those who
haven't encountered the abbreviation or learned its meaning, it's a much
tougher nut to crack.

If there /must/ be a change here, I'd advocate removing the phrase
altogether. When a text mentions a related topic, it creates an implicit
suggestion for further reading – there's no need to point it out. This
is especially true for Emacs, where almost all such topics exist and
are in the same resource – Emacs itself – making qv redundant.