Valentin Villenave wrote Friday, November 26, 2010 10:31 PM
Thanks! I've pushed this patch, and merged translation onto master
Great! Appreciated!
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 10:41 PM, Trevor Daniels
<t.dani...@treda.co.uk> wrote:
Ideally, yes. But who is going to look manually through
all the docs?
Er... Hello? :-) What do you think I've been doing for the past
week or so? :)
Oh, I thought you were doing it with fancy regexps.
No <smile> I was just suggesting better English, but the spacing
went awry - "that" should have been under "who" - "Long entries
are
those /that/ contain ...". (You once asked us to do that, IIRC :)
Oh, thanks! I do tend to get confused between these: "the people
who",
"the things that", "the things which" (does "which" even work with
plural?).
Yes, it's fine with plurals.
The last two are both OK, although some maintain that "which"
should only be used to introduce a parenthetical clause: "the
things,
which John brought, were ..." although "that" wouldn't be seriously
wrong here either. But "who" is a no-no unless the subject is a
real person or maybe an animal that is considered to be almost
a person, like a pet.
Trevor
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
