On Friday 20 August 2010 14:20:35 Bill Longman wrote: > On 08/19/2010 04:38 PM, Peter Humphrey wrote: > > On Thursday 19 August 2010 21:21:20 Kevin O'Gorman wrote: > >> So I looked up "auto-hinter" in the flagedit(1) program. It says: > >> auto-hinter: Local Flag: Use the unpatented auto-hinter instead > >> of the (recommended) TrueType bytecode interpreter (media- > >> libs/freetype) > >> > >> The placement of the "(recommended)" is just a bit ambiguous. > > > > No, it isn't. You may be being confused by the unnecessary > > inclusion of brackets (parentheses if you're American); remove > > them and you see that the TrueType byte-code interpreter is > > recommended. Or, just consider the phrase "the recommended > > TrueType bytecode interpreter", with or without brackets. I can't > > see how that could be thought ambiguous. > > I have to agree it's ambiguous. You have to wonder why the > parenthetical "recommended" is offset if it's just part of the > sentence. If it were as you say, there would be no need to put them > there. As it is written it sounds like it's making an aside claiming > that one of them is recommended and, by its placement, it's hard to > discern its antecedent.
Its placement puts it squarely with the noun phrase following it. To associate it with the preceding one instead would be perverse. (Just to continue flogging a dead horse...) :-) I agree though that the brackets are neither necessary nor helpful. -- Rgds Peter. Linux Counter 5290, 1994-04-23.
