Re: [PATCH v2] Provide some linguistic guidance for the documentation.

2013-08-02 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Junio C Hamano wrote: Is that accurate? My impression has been: The documentation liberally mixes US and UK English (en_US/UK) norms for spelling and grammar, which is somewhat unfortunate. In an ideal world, it would have been better if it consistently used only one and

Re: [PATCH v2] Provide some linguistic guidance for the documentation.

2013-08-02 Thread Marc Branchaud
On 13-08-02 02:25 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: Junio C Hamano wrote: Is that accurate? My impression has been: The documentation liberally mixes US and UK English (en_US/UK) norms for spelling and grammar, which is somewhat unfortunate. In an ideal world, it would have been

[PATCH v2] Provide some linguistic guidance for the documentation.

2013-08-01 Thread Marc Branchaud
This will hopefully avoid questions over which spelling and grammar should be used. Translators are of course free to create localizations for other specific English dialects. Signed-off-by: Marc Branchaud marcn...@xiplink.com --- A little less stringent now. Documentation/CodingGuidelines |

Re: [PATCH v2] Provide some linguistic guidance for the documentation.

2013-08-01 Thread Marc Branchaud
On 13-08-01 11:10 AM, Marc Branchaud wrote: This will hopefully avoid questions over which spelling and grammar should be used. Translators are of course free to create localizations for other Oops, I should have removed the word other here. M. specific English dialects.

Re: [PATCH v2] Provide some linguistic guidance for the documentation.

2013-08-01 Thread Junio C Hamano
Marc Branchaud marcn...@xiplink.com writes: + The documentation generally follows US English (en_US) norms for spelling + and grammar, although most spelling variations are tolerated. Just avoid + mixing styles when updating existing text. If you wish to correct the + English of some of the