From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Mark Harig Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: Re: Typos in the manual Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:43:13 -0500 Message-ID: <8CD9B9A6430A5CE-714-4AA4@webmail-d099.sysops.aol.com> References: <20110208202529.GD16805@gmx.de> <874o88kbbs.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net><8CD9B68D2F170D1-714-CAC@webmail-d099.sysops.aol.com><20110215211443.GG24361@gmx.de><8CD9B775B2E1E50-714-23E5@webmail-d099.sysops.aol.com> <87mxlw7s3i.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1297824480 8220 80.91.229.12 (16 Feb 2011 02:48:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 02:48:00 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bug-guile@gnu.org, Ralf.Wildenhues@gmx.de To: neil@ossau.uklinux.net Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 16 03:47:54 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-bugs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PpXQl-00087f-Lx for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 03:47:52 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55984 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PpXMY-0001qs-SY for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:43:30 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=56750 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PpXMT-0001qD-Hx for bug-guile@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:43:26 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PpXMS-0006oK-Eo for bug-guile@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:43:25 -0500 Original-Received: from imr-da06.mx.aol.com ([205.188.169.203]:38541) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PpXMS-0006oG-8g for bug-guile@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:43:24 -0500 Original-Received: from imo-da03.mx.aol.com (imo-da03.mx.aol.com [205.188.169.201]) by imr-da06.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id p1G2hKEs005188; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:43:20 -0500 Original-Received: from idirectscm@aim.com by imo-da03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v42.9.) id 8.ed7.10642ba0 (43887); Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:43:16 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from smtprly-me03.mx.aol.com (smtprly-me03.mx.aol.com [64.12.95.104]) by cia-dc04.mx.aol.com (v129.7) with ESMTP id MAILCIADC048-b30c4d5b39c13be; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:43:16 -0500 Original-Received: from webmail-d099 (webmail-d099.sim.aol.com [205.188.255.20]) by smtprly-me03.mx.aol.com (v129.8) with ESMTP id MAILSMTPRLYME034-b30c4d5b39c13be; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:43:14 -0500 X-MB-Message-Type: User Original-Received: from 98.185.24.91 by webmail-d099.sysops.aol.com (205.188.255.20) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:43:13 -0500 X-AOL-IP: 98.185.24.91 X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-Mailer: AIM WebMail 33222-STANDARD In-Reply-To: <87mxlw7s3i.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> X-AOL-SENDER: idirectscm@aim.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 205.188.169.203 X-BeenThere: bug-guile@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Bug reports for GUILE, GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:5147 Archived-At: > >> Also, while the Chicago Manual of Style recommends it, some other > > online > >> grammar sites mention that it is American English style, but=20 British > >> English would not add a comma afterwards. > > My feeling is consistent with that. I'm British, and I'd say there=20 are > lots of cases where it is more natural (to me) not to have a comma=20 after > "i.e." or "e.g.". > This is the crux of the argument. Should the GNU Guile manual be written using British English or American English, both in grammar and spelling? American English usage rules require a comma, while British English requires that there not to be a comma. There needs to be a decision about which set of usage rules should be used in the primary version of the manual, and then differences can be resolved in translations. But whichever is decided, it should not be "use a comma if you feel it's needed; otherwise, leave it out." Reference manuals are not the place for personal style. Let's leave that for tutorials. --