On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 4:14 AM, Justin B Rye <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Leandro Gómez wrote:My input is still being ignored, so I'll repeat it (over and over
> AFAIK all the logos are there (in the last PNG preview I sent).
> There has been a lot of discussion on the proper/official name of Republika
> Sprska and the purpose of the ad. There has also been some minor suggestions,
> such as some changes to the text, adding the website URL, etc. I've tried to
> make all the changes according to your feedback and I guess that we now need
> someone to close this discussion, approve the final design and send the ad to
until I see some evidence of anyone taking it in).
Putting "Banja Luka, in Republic of Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina" in
the middle of a sentence is a good way of confusing readers who aren't
experts on the nomenclature of the region. It's very tempting to
misparse it so that "of X, Y & Z" is all one phrase - an ambiguity
that can easily be avoided by phrasing it as "Banja Luka, in Republic
of Srpska (Bosnia and Herzegovina)".
But I notice this isn't even the same terminology as is used in the
titles just above, which say:
BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA
It would make more sense to be consistent with that and avoid the
strange half-anglicised version: "Banja Luka, in Republika Srpska
(Bosnia and Herzegovina)". This would make the parentheses less
necessary, but I would still recommend using them.
Yes. The "Republic of Srpska" bit is a bug. I'll change it to "Republika Srpska".
OTOH, I think "Banja Luka, in Republika Sprska, Bosnia and Herzegovina" is correct. There shouldn't be any parenthesis. You don't say "Chicago, Illinois (U.S.A.)".
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package