Re: [PATCH 0/6] manual: Fix or remove em dashes.
- From
- Ralf Wildenhues <ralf.wildenhues@gmx.de>
- Date
- Oct 9, 2007, 21:52 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20071009215255.GB3146@ins.uni-bonn.de>
- In-Reply-To
- <18071eea0710091441n717c0a99p58a9b585d15cc778@mail.gmail.com>
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:
Show 6 quoted lines
> 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! ;-)
Cheers, Ralf