Hi Alex, At 2022-07-23T01:08:18+0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > I'm reading tbl(1), so I'll report a few (minor issues) I found:
Thank you; I appreciate the review. Yours is the first it's gotten since I rewrote it. > [ > spaces, or tabs. (AT&T tbl accepted only options with > all characters in the same lettercase.) Some of these > ] > > since the parenthesized sentence refers to the sentence previous to > it, I'd put it as part of it (notice the placement of periods): > > [ > spaces, or tabs (AT&T tbl accepted only options with > all characters in the same lettercase). Some of these > ] I disagree with this, because I find it awkward to put one complete sentence as a parenthetical inside another. I believe a sentence should remain grammatical even if the parentheses are removed. I admit to some severity on this point, but all too often as a reader, I find amateur technical writers employing punctuation as an excuse to discard the rules of standard grammar. That is not what punctuation is for. > I miss a comma: > > [ > all characters in the same lettercase.) Some of these > options require a parenthesized argument; those that do[,] > permit spaces and tabs between the option’s name and the > opening parenthesis. Options accumulate and cannot be > ] I've stumbled over that in re-reading, myself. I'll make this change. > Expect to see more reports about that page soon :) Looking forward to it! Regards, Branden
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature