Re: [copyright-format] English proofreading.
- To: email@example.com
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: [copyright-format] English proofreading.
- From: Jonathan Nieder <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 11:45:06 -0600
- Message-id: <20120208174506.GC6712@burratino>
- In-reply-to: <20120208145406.GA3606@plessy.org>
- References: <20111115012421.GA6917@elie.hsd1.il.comcast.net> <20111113170105.GA12214@elie.hsd1.il.comcast.net> <20111121174740.GA23632@belanna.comodo.priv.at> <20111128150905.GA29598@merveille.plessy.net> <20120208145406.GA3606@plessy.org>
Charles Plessy wrote:
> here is an update of the English proofreading (attached as a patch).
Looks good to me.
> - "Another kind of list value has one value per line". Not straightforward...
Doesn't seem so bad. How would you propose rewording it?
> - "the Copyright field for a paragraph covering both file A and file B need
> contain only:". Isn't it "needs to contain only" ?
"Need contain only" sounds much better than "needs to contain only" to
my ear, but I was not sure why. So I ran a quick web search for "he
need not" and found this:
I certainly wouldn't mind rewording this to make life easier for
translators. Maybe "if file A has ... then the Copyright field ...
only needs to contain" or "... need not contain more than"?
> - "priority of ors and ands. and has the priority over or." Looks like an
> exercise for speech and language therapy ?
Some quotation marks around "or" and "and" might help. Since starting
a sentence with a lowercase letter is typographically awkward, it
might also be worth adding a few filler words, as in 'The conjunction
"and" has priority over "or".'
Hope that helps,