On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 5:03 AM, Steven M. Schweda <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey. Don't give up so easily. While it's possible to find backing > for almost any opinion involving an apostrophe, a rule like "plural, not > possessive" is much too simple to be reliable. See, for example:
Ha! :-))) Well, my Strunk & White (4th ed., 2000 AD) don't say nuttin' about throwing in an apostrophe here, but, yes, I'm with you. Some of the way. I have to concede that, yes, I behaved too much like a meek sheep in this. Ignoring the fundamental flaw in the entire argument for a moment, the google output seems overwhelming, yet trusting google democracy / vox populi, which we all know since Churchill at the very last, is not really leading the way towards reaching the pinnacle of brainiac achievement either. Given the graveness of the issue, I will retire to HQ and ponder this sorry affair. A suitable, definite statement to settle the matter will be forthcoming shortly. -- Met vriendelijke groeten / Best regards, Ger Hobbelt -------------------------------------------------- web: http://www.hobbelt.com/ http://www.hebbut.net/ mail: [email protected] mobile: +31-6-11 120 978 -------------------------------------------------- ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [email protected] Automated List Manager [email protected]
