G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
> I am using a Linux varient. Remember that we have slightly different
> views on what is an error. What you call an error, I call a style of
> writing. So lets keep the use of error to a minimum. For example,
> spelling is either en_GB or en_CA.
BTW, your use of "varient" was not found in my dictionaries, which take
localization into account. Also,"let's" should be used with its apostrophe.
Being aware of localization differences of English in the US, UK, and
the Commonwealth, I still consider that having no space between two
words as being an error, such as "thoseusing" in: "Graphics are for the
most part thoseusing the older style..." [I probably should have also
used commas around "for the most part" also, but I usually tend to
minimize comma usage.]
Now, consider this "sentence": "All tThese will change frequently as the
1.9/2.0 cycle comes more stableprogresses."
There are three errors here, regardless of which variant of English was
used:
(a) "tThese"--obvious typo
(b) "stableprogresses"--again no space between words.
(c) However, here is a case where one of those words should have been
deleted anyway during the editing process but wasn't. So, I just simply
deleted "comes more stable".
Another sentence on that page: "This User's Guide is designed for users
who are already familiar with the basic functions of their computer."
Users don't usually share one computer.
And yet another: "It is focused on OpenOffice.org 2.x releases but, it
should be..."
CMoS 15th, 6.32 calls for the comma to be before "but" (and not after
the coordinating conjunction). CMoS 15th, 6.59 would allow a semicolon
be added before "but" for emphasis, along with the comma usage as in the
original. So, that sentence was incorrect on both counts according to
the University of Chicago's grammar cops...
Take note that I didn't go into any of the line edits (concerning style
or improved wording) which I suggested, just the actual typographic,
grammatical, or punctuation errors on that page. Furthermore, nothing
due to any localization differences in English was considered while
copyediting.
Anyway, I generally don't mark up editing rationale unless I'm making a
point or educating others. However, I would definitely consider this
single-page Overview as containing "numerous" errors because of its very
high error rate.
>
> And do you think you could fix your Reply-to so it doesn't break
> threading in the list?
>
> Do make sure that you have the most recent version of any chapter. Also
> check the page style in the section as it may be depending on what is
> specified in the master. I think I set each up but ...
The break in threading was most likely a result of my continually
receiving two emails of some of your missives AND I responded to the one
that apparently was not in the thread. That my $0.02 on that issue.
As to the most recent versions, I checked the list of files for that and
most of the comments mentioned in your issue. AFAIK, I'm using the most
recent versions, as posted for your issue.
On another point, is the New Features (master22) section ever going to
be included in the master document at some point?
Later,
Gary
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
