Apologies if you were expecting this yesterday, Alberta had a three-day weekends, and I didn't get onto the computer much over the weekend.
> > Yoiks! The whole PC thing is going a bit too far, > becoming like "newspeak". I could go on a rant, but > I'll bite my tongue, here. I wonder if we should add > something to help translators and non-newspeak > readers. Problem is, anything I can think of at the > moment is either non-PC, or just sounds dumb (like > "low vision or optics issues"). :-/ > > [AT] I know what you mean about the PC thing. I think > your point about adding something is valid. I can't > think of anything workable either, but I'll keep my > mind open to possibilities. Maybe something will come > to me at 2 in the morning. :-) I know the feeling. If something comes to me in the dark of the night, I'll pass it along. > [AT] Yeah, I think you're right. The whole-book index > review will need to be one of the last tasks we do. > With the tool I'm using, change-tracking can be > quirky in the index. For example, an index entry can > look wrong even when it's not. So, I'll need to be at > the point of accepting all the changes. In that case, > reviewers would need to look at the entire index, not > just the changes. Do you think that'll work? Yep, I think that makes sense. Shame about the tool, but we works with what we gots. ;-) I'm not sure every item will get checked, but the basic look can be proofed for correct indentation, etc., and then each reviewer can pick a--preferably large--number of random items for accuracy, at which point we can consider the index "mostly accurate", or some such. If every item must be checked, perhaps that can be divvied up logically. Rainer This message posted from opensolaris.org
