Re: [PATCHES] doc cleanup: proper emdashes

2004-11-14 Thread Michael Glaesemann
On Nov 15, 2004, at 3:35 PM, Neil Conway wrote: ("--" might be considered an en dash, but AFAIK it is incorrect to use an en dash to designate a parenthetical comment anyway). Then again, wouldn't parentheses be the appropriate punctuation for a parenthetical comment? :P Michael Glaesemann grzm m

Re: [PATCHES] doc cleanup: proper emdashes

2004-11-14 Thread Neil Conway
On Mon, 2004-11-15 at 11:27 +1100, Neil Conway wrote: > This patch replaces "---" with "—" in the documentation, which is > the proper SGML character entity for an emdash. Patch applied. I also fixed up cases where "--" was used in a similar fashion ("--" might be considered an en dash, but AFAIK

Re: [PATCHES] doc cleanup: proper emdashes

2004-11-14 Thread Neil Conway
On Mon, 2004-11-15 at 01:35 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Is ". ---" really correct? I think there should be no period there. Good catch -- I'll rephrase that text. -Neil ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please

Re: [PATCHES] doc cleanup: proper emdashes

2004-11-14 Thread Alvaro Herrera
On Mon, Nov 15, 2004 at 11:27:39AM +1100, Neil Conway wrote: > --- doc/src/sgml/dfunc.sgml > +++ doc/src/sgml/dfunc.sgml > @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ >in memory when they are loaded by the executable. (Object files >intended for executables are usually not compiled that way.) The >command to

Re: [PATCHES] doc cleanup: proper emdashes

2004-11-14 Thread Alvaro Herrera
On Mon, Nov 15, 2004 at 03:39:00PM +1100, Neil Conway wrote: > On Mon, 2004-11-15 at 01:35 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Is ". ---" really correct? I think there should be no period there. > > Good catch -- I'll rephrase that text. ^^ Hey, this should have been a proper em-dash t