From: Horst H. von Brand <vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl>
Result of a run of aspell(1) over the *.txt files in Documentation. Also fixed several other typoes.
Signed-off-by: Horst H. von Brand <vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl> ---
threads / patch / 4382
patch, 27 partsDocumentation: Spelling fixes
Subject: [PATCH 0/27] Documentation: Spelling fixes
Jakub NarebskiRe: [PATCH 0/27] Documentation: Spelling fixes
Horst.H.von.Brand@inf.utfsm.cl wrote:
> From: Horst H. von Brand <vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl> > > Result of a run of aspell(1) over the *.txt files in Documentation. Also > fixed several other typoes.
Some of them (behavior vs. behaviour) are just the difference between American nad British English. And couldn't do that all in _one_ patch?
-- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland
Junio C HamanoRe: [PATCH 0/27] Documentation: Spelling fixes
Thanks.
Most do not seem to be typoes, depending on where you learned the language (XYZour vs XYZor; ok, Ok, and OK; ie vs i.e.). I favour the latter two changes myself, but honestly, I do not deeply care that much. The rest are real typos.
It seems that 1/27 did not make here, nor either of the two big mailing list archives (gmane and marc).
Nikolai WeibullRe: [PATCH 0/27] Documentation: Spelling fixes
On 6/4/06, Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote:
> Most do not seem to be typoes, depending on where you learned > the language (XYZour vs XYZor; ok, Ok, and OK; ie vs i.e.).
Where do you write "ie" instead of "i.e."?
In Swedish, there has been a trend to remove dots from abbreviated expressions, but it seems people are returning to use dots. Personally, I find that dots make things a lot clearer.
nikolai
Andreas EricssonRe: [PATCH 0/27] Documentation: Spelling fixes
Nikolai Weibull wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> On 6/4/06, Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote: > >> Most do not seem to be typoes, depending on where you learned >> the language (XYZour vs XYZor; ok, Ok, and OK; ie vs i.e.). > > > Where do you write "ie" instead of "i.e."? >
Mailing lists, online conversations, tech docs written in code editors... Compare with online'ish abbrevs (afaict, iirc, imo, fyi).
> In Swedish, there has been a trend to remove dots from abbreviated > expressions, but it seems people are returning to use dots. > Personally, I find that dots make things a lot clearer. >
Swedish has lots of abbreviations where one "part" of the abbreviation consists of multiple characters, like t.ex.
When each character of the abbrev defines one complete word dots are just prettiness-noise, their presence or absence decided by the gravity of the meaning ("R.I.P." vs "ie"). Obviously, correctness never hurts but this is, on two accounts, punktknulleri.
-- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231
Nikolai WeibullRe: [PATCH 0/27] Documentation: Spelling fixes
On 6/5/06, Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se> wrote:
Show 11 quoted lines
> Nikolai Weibull wrote: > > On 6/4/06, Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote: > > > >> Most do not seem to be typoes, depending on where you learned > >> the language (XYZour vs XYZor; ok, Ok, and OK; ie vs i.e.). > > > > Where do you write "ie" instead of "i.e."? > > > > Mailing lists, online conversations, tech docs written in code > editors...
Do you mean that code editors usually don't let you enter a dot into the buffer, or what?
> Compare with online'ish abbrevs (afaict, iirc, imo, fyi).
That's hardly the same thing. Most people would upcase AFAICT, IIRC, IMO, and FYI.
I wouldn't group "i.e." with such abbreviations in any case. (Hehe.)
Show 6 quoted lines
> > In Swedish, there has been a trend to remove dots from abbreviated > > expressions, but it seems people are returning to use dots. > > Personally, I find that dots make things a lot clearer. > > Swedish has lots of abbreviations where one "part" of the abbreviation > consists of multiple characters, like t.ex.
And "bl.a.".
> When each character of the abbrev defines one complete word dots are
> just prettiness-noise, their presence or absence decided by the gravity
> of the meaning ("R.I.P." vs "ie"). Obviously, correctness never hurts
> but this is, on two accounts, punktknulleri.Considering that people don't want to get stuck on trying to understand what the word "ie" is supposed to mean in a manual page they're trying to understand what some command does (this happened to me), I really think that fucking with the dots is called for.
Anyway, the general guidelines recommended by "The Chicago Manual of Style" are:
Use periods with abbreviations that appear in lowercase letters; use no periods with abbreviations that appear in full capitals or small capitals, whether two letters or more.
One possible solution is to expand "i.e." to "that is" (or something equally befitting) and "e.g." to "for example", "such as", or similar.
nikolai
Andreas EricssonRe: [PATCH 0/27] Documentation: Spelling fixes
Nikolai Weibull wrote:
Show 18 quoted lines
> On 6/5/06, Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se> wrote: > >> Nikolai Weibull wrote: >> > On 6/4/06, Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote: >> > >> >> Most do not seem to be typoes, depending on where you learned >> >> the language (XYZour vs XYZor; ok, Ok, and OK; ie vs i.e.). >> > >> > Where do you write "ie" instead of "i.e."? >> > >> >> Mailing lists, online conversations, tech docs written in code >> editors... > > > Do you mean that code editors usually don't let you enter a dot into > the buffer, or what? >
No, I mean that people are lazy when writing online and for an audience that broadly share the same sort of text-digesting mind, so they don't bother with the dots.
>> Compare with online'ish abbrevs (afaict, iirc, imo, fyi). > > > That's hardly the same thing.
Why not? Both are examples of one-letter-per-word abbreviations.
> Most people would upcase AFAICT, IIRC, > IMO, and FYI. >
True, but both forms are common enough. I guess I'm one of the lazier ones, since I regularly use lower-case.
> I wouldn't group "i.e." with such abbreviations in any case. (Hehe.) >
I fail to see why not. I also fail to care very much, so feel free not to respond. ;)
Show 22 quoted lines
>
>> When each character of the abbrev defines one complete word dots are
>> just prettiness-noise, their presence or absence decided by the gravity
>> of the meaning ("R.I.P." vs "ie"). Obviously, correctness never hurts
>> but this is, on two accounts, punktknulleri.
>
>
> Considering that people don't want to get stuck on trying to
> understand what the word "ie" is supposed to mean in a manual page
> they're trying to understand what some command does (this happened to
> me), I really think that fucking with the dots is called for.
>
> Anyway, the general guidelines recommended by "The Chicago Manual of
> Style" are:
>
> Use periods with abbreviations that appear in lowercase letters; use
> no periods with abbreviations that appear in full capitals or small
> capitals, whether two letters or more.
>
> One possible solution is to expand "i.e." to "that is" (or something
> equally befitting) and "e.g." to "for example", "such as", or similar.
> This is most likely the best solution as it's easier for foreign readers with limited proficiency in reading english and english abbreviations borrowed from latin, as they don't make sense if you try to put in english words matching the abbreviation, dots or no dots. This gave me quite a headache when I was twelve and tried to install Linux for the first time :)
-- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231