Re: [PATCHES] Documentation typos

2005-10-15 Thread Neil Conway
On Thu, 2005-13-10 at 00:39 -0600, Michael Fuhr wrote: > Correct several typos in the documentation. Applied to HEAD -- thanks for the patch. I also removed the comment from the cvs.sgml file. -Neil ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions be

Re: [PATCHES] Documentation typos

2005-10-14 Thread Michael Fuhr
On Fri, Oct 14, 2005 at 06:18:08PM -0400, Neil Conway wrote: > On Thu, 2005-13-10 at 00:39 -0600, Michael Fuhr wrote: > > Correct several typos in the documentation. > > Are there any remaining objections to this patch? Otherwise, I'll apply > it within 24 hours. I could submit a version with ran

Re: [PATCHES] Documentation typos

2005-10-14 Thread Neil Conway
On Thu, 2005-13-10 at 00:39 -0600, Michael Fuhr wrote: > Correct several typos in the documentation. Are there any remaining objections to this patch? Otherwise, I'll apply it within 24 hours. -Neil ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you search

Re: [PATCHES] Documentation typos

2005-10-13 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
So what? I just don't see consistency as being a value in itself, but only when it has some other merit. Clearly you don't agree, but I am with Emerson on the subject of consistency. So you're saying you're consistent in your objections to consistency? :) ---(end of br

Re: [PATCHES] Documentation typos

2005-10-13 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Neil Conway wrote: > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/fdp-primer/writing-s >tyle.html I can heartily recommend this, and I have deferred to this many times over the years. I disagree with the point on "Avoid redundant phrases", though, and in fact it contradicts error message st

Re: [PATCHES] Documentation typos

2005-10-13 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Andrew Dunstan wrote: > Is there an official spelling standard for PostgreSQL? While nothing is ever really official around here, the documentation is susceptible to being hit by my spell-checking tool, which has historically tended to use whatever "american" aspell dictionary I had installed a

Re: [PATCHES] Documentation typos

2005-10-13 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Michael Fuhr wrote: That's 5 changes out of 245 total occurrences. So what? I just don't see consistency as being a value in itself, but only when it has some other merit. Clearly you don't agree, but I am with Emerson on the subject of consistency. cheers andrew --

Re: [PATCHES] Documentation typos

2005-10-13 Thread Michael Fuhr
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 01:48:11PM -0400, Neil Conway wrote: > On Thu, 2005-13-10 at 12:17 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > I don't agree that we need to force one spelling of common words when > > many dictionaries recognise the validity of variant spellings. > > There is obviously no "need" to f

Re: [PATCHES] Documentation typos

2005-10-13 Thread Neil Conway
On Thu, 2005-13-10 at 12:17 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > I don't agree that we need to force one spelling of common words when > many dictionaries recognise the validity of variant spellings. There is obviously no "need" to force the use of one spelling variant or another. However, I think it is

Re: [PATCHES] Documentation typos

2005-10-13 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Michael Fuhr wrote: On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 09:55:55AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: You seem to have lots of time on your hands if you can worry about this. How you spend it is your business, of course, but playing spelling cop doesn't seem worth it to me. Whether you agree or not,

Re: [PATCHES] Documentation typos

2005-10-13 Thread Neil Conway
On Thu, 2005-13-10 at 10:16 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Given that a substantial fraction of our community is accustomed to > British spellings, I've never felt that it was appropriate to try to > standardize either way. The same reasoning applies to the audience of (and contributors to) most publica

Re: [PATCHES] Documentation typos

2005-10-13 Thread Neil Conway
On Thu, 2005-13-10 at 09:55 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > You seem to have lots of time on your hands if you can worry about this. > How you spend it is your business, of course, but playing spelling cop > doesn't seem worth it to me. I think it's a perfectly valid thing to fix. Part of quality

Re: [PATCHES] Documentation typos

2005-10-13 Thread Michael Fuhr
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 09:55:55AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > You seem to have lots of time on your hands if you can worry about this. > How you spend it is your business, of course, but playing spelling cop > doesn't seem worth it to me. Whether you agree or not, some people judge a product

Re: [PATCHES] Documentation typos

2005-10-13 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Is there an official spelling standard for PostgreSQL? There is not. Given that a substantial fraction of our community is accustomed to British spellings, I've never felt that it was appropriate to try to standardize either way. I just leave it the w

Re: [PATCHES] Documentation typos

2005-10-13 Thread Dave Page
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Andrew Dunstan > Sent: 13 October 2005 14:56 > To: Michael Fuhr > Cc: pgsql-patches@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Documentation typos > > > You seem t

Re: [PATCHES] Documentation typos

2005-10-13 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Michael Fuhr wrote: I took the liberty of making the following spelling changes for consistency with the rest of the documentation, even though the originals are the preferred spellings in some parts of the English- speaking world. I found only one or two instances of each; the latter forms w

Re: [PATCHES] Documentation typos

2005-10-13 Thread Neil Conway
On Thu, 2005-13-10 at 00:39 -0600, Michael Fuhr wrote: > *** doc/src/sgml/cvs.sgml 11 Aug 2005 13:52:33 - 1.34 > --- doc/src/sgml/cvs.sgml 13 Oct 2005 06:15:38 - > *** > *** 849,855 > to you the malloc code and an additional installation e-mail from > Joh

[PATCHES] Documentation typos

2005-10-12 Thread Michael Fuhr
Correct several typos in the documentation. I took the liberty of making the following spelling changes for consistency with the rest of the documentation, even though the originals are the preferred spellings in some parts of the English- speaking world. I found only one or two instances of each