Re: [PATCH 0/6] manual: Fix or remove em dashes.
- From
Thomas Adam <thomas.adam22@gmail.com>
- Date
- Oct 9, 2007, 22:02 UTC
- Message-ID
- <18071eea0710091502y3b70231dnd4270a3155af91a8@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20071009215255.GB3146@ins.uni-bonn.de>
On 09/10/2007, Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues@gmx.de> wrote:
Show 25 quoted lines
> Hello, and sorry, this patch should be number 6/6 of course. > > * Thomas Adam wrote on Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 11:41:41PM CEST: > > On 09/10/2007, Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues@gmx.de> wrote: > > > em dashes were used inconsistently in the manual. > > > This changes them to the way they are used in US English. > > > > I find this particular patch to be rather odd; there is nothing > > invalid in the way the em-dashes are used. > > No, not invalid, just inconsistent usage in the manual. > > > Why is it US English is somehow de facto over, say, proper English? > > :) > > Oh, that was written quoting from memory and experience. But here's a > quote to back it up, from <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dash> as of now: > > | According to most American sources (e.g., The Chicago Manual of Style) > | and to some British sources (e.g., The Oxford Guide to Style), an em > | dash should always be set closed (not surrounded by spaces). But the > | practice in many parts of the English-speaking world[...] sets it > | open [...] > > No, I did not write that! ;-)
Well, I don't see why it needs to change, to be honest. I use em-dashes all the time surrounded by spaces, as do many academics. The fact that may here in the UK do not use the letter z in place of s to satisfy the OSD is also of equal testament to this.
-- Thomas Adam