It reads weird Lisp and Scheme in the same list with
the other languages: for instance, in that list,
Lisp and Python looks two independent categories, but
Scheme is a subcategory of Lisp.
I prefer to introduce Scheme in the next sentence as
follows:
I don't see what the new wording makes clearer, rather I think it
makes it unclear. The list specifies _languages_, Lisp being one (GNU
Emacs Lisp and Common Lisp being the ones refered to), and Scheme
being another. Not language "categories".
Thank you for your e-mail.
IMHO my suggestion is more clear and the list shows a better logical
structure. Certainy my wording can be improved by native english
speakers, but that is not the main point that i am addressing:
Scheme is a Lisp dialect, Python not; that is what i meant by categories.
The logical relation between elements in the list is not symmetric
including Scheme: there is one that relates specially with another.
As it is written now, it could also be (why not?):
"Lisp, Scheme, Guile, Python, Ruby, and Java".
I prefer going from the general to the particular: first list elements
entering in the same foot, and then we can mention about Scheme (dialect
of Lisp) and furthermore introduce Guile (implementation/dialect of
Scheme).
