ok. I guess I didn't trust the Australian well enough. :-) -- Anders
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:59:08AM -0700, Ridgway Scott wrote: > It is a small point of the English language that allows a title to > be shorter > than what you would say in a phrase. You would say "now we study > THE Poisson equation" but the formal title is shorter. For example, I > think the formal title is University of Chicago, whereas it is The > University > of Michigan. Titles can be jarring, such as the Art Institute of Chicago > (which should instead be the Chicago Institute of Art) or the one I > created: the Computation Institute (which many people called the > Computational Institute for a long time). > > So Poisson Equation is a fine title, but other terms are equally valid. > > Ridg > > On Aug 31, 2010, at 7:15 AM, Anders Logg wrote: > > >On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 03:07:32PM +0100, Garth N. Wells wrote: > >> > >> > >>On 31/08/10 15:04, Anders Logg wrote: > >>>"Poisson equation" sounds strange to me. Shouldn't it be either > >>>"Poisson's equation", "The Poisson equation", or "A Poisson > >>>equation"? > >>> > >> > >>"Poisson equation" is commonly used. > > > >I've never seen it and think it looks strange. > > > >>So is "Poisson's equation", but we > >>don't use "Stokes'", "Cahn-Hilliard's", "Navier-Stokes'", etc. > >>It's not > >>"A", because there is only one. > > > >I don't use "Navier-Stokes' equations". I write "the Navier-Stokes > >equations" to get around that. > > > -- Anders _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
