A fine comment! Again, apologies for any annoyance caused by my off-key comments earlier.
Despite appearances, I am not some raving anti-American, nor am I a 'BBC English' pedant. I am someone, however, who believes that there is value in accurately conveying instructions. To that end, localisations (localizations?) for any language with a lot of diversity (whether American, French, Spanish or whatever), is needed. It's a pain for developers, but it leads to a more accessible end-product. Whether it's done by 'translating' American to British (plus NZ, Canadian, etc), or using short, simple sentences that (hopefully) are clear to all concerned, it up to those writing the material in question. Have a nice day, y'all ;-) ZF On 29 Jan 2011 at 18:22, Pat wrote: > A discussion of standard English is like a discussion of square clouds, or > a marching troop of 3 columns of 10 cats each. A discussion can be had of > the theoretical existence of such an entity, but in reality, it does not > exist. We get as close as we can, and work around the rest, similar to > working with "pi" in geometry. > English(UK) is quite different in various parts of London, without > mentioning Cardiff, Carlisle or Orkney Island differences. > English in Boston, New York, San Antonio, or Harkers Island. (Many Harkers > Island residents speak a distinct dialect of English, akin to Elizabethan > English.) > It would seem that we aught to choose the standard which suits our > particular purpose most closely, and live with the wrongs of those who > disagree with us. > After eighty years, I still use "harbour". and put a plaster on a cut. > > Respectfully > Pat Rotchford > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
