To bring this thread back to encouraging diversity, I must point out
that diverse English dialects are not all there is to diversity, folks.

Nathaniel Smith writes:

 > In particular, it emphasizes that the new text is accomplishing
 > "the same goal", "maintaining the original intent",

That displays a great misunderstanding of that goal and intent in my
opinion.  The original intent clearly includes providing *concrete*
guidelines, because no student of Strunk & White would use a reference
to Strunk & White if the phrase "clear and easily understood" would do.

Strunk & White is not a grammar of "Standard" English.  It is a Zen-
of-Python-like collection of precepts, many of which inform my own
writing in Japanese (!!) as well as in English, and my Japanese and
Chinese students have expressed appreciation for them.  While the
quirkiness of Strunk & White appeals to me personally, replacing it
with an explicit set of guidelines directly modeled on the Zen or an
alternative reference would serve the purpose as well.

But I do not know of a good substitute for this purpose.  I don't
think David's suggestion of Zinsser would serve so well.  It is a
textbook and quite discursive[1], while the table of contents of
Strunk & White is quite Zen-like, and little more than twice as long
as the Zen.

>From the lack of any mention of this aspect of Strunk & White, it's
clear that the commit was made with little or no consideration for the
many developers, current and potential, whose native language is *not*
English, nor for some neuro-atypical programmers, for whom generalities
like "be clear" may be deterring and explicit rules comforting.  That
doesn't mean simple removal of that reference was the wrong thing to
do, but it does mean that removing it without replacement needs more
justification than "it's a 'relic of white supremacy'".

I agree that the goal of encouraging diversity among community members
justifies substantial cost, which is repaid in many ways.  It is
certainly true that some of the precepts of Strunk & White are simple
grammar rules that are specific to Standard English, and in that sense
center whiteness.  But the loss to some, perhaps many, developers from
failing to provide *any* concrete guidelines may be large.  That
should have been considered before committing, and in my opinion,
replacement guidelines or an alternative reference included.  This
loss was mentioned several times in the discussion on Python Ideas --
and ignored.

I sure hope it will be considered now.

Steve


Footnotes: 
[1]  And probably suffers from "centering whiteness," though perhaps
not to the degree that Strunk & White does.  It's been a while since
I've looked at Zinsser.
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/45HIBLYFJ2TNWNJZS2MZNP2CSQRKDJW3/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Reply via email to