James <pkx1...@gmail.com> writes: > On 26 December 2012 11:00, <d...@gnu.org> wrote:
>> Documentation/contributor/doc-work.itexi:155: The correct way to add >> [changes like this] to the documentation is to >>> > Why the [] ? >> >> >>> This is a standard way to to clarify the antecedent. >> Another frequent use is to make explicit what object a pronoun in a >> quoted section is referring to if the scope of the quotation does not >> allow deducing it. > > That's the 'antecedent' thingy I referred to. Well, ok, but again I know it only when something is inserted into a quotation, where original author and editor differ. Our manual pretends to be a single text, so one would use () instead of [] for clarifying interjections. > I thought I might get responses like this, which is why I rewrote the > sentence. Smart move. > Life is too short. But at least it is getting longer all the time. > Merry Christmas The same to you and many more. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
