Re: Typos in the manual

[Francis Southern]

On 15 February 2011 20:43, Mark Harig <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> >> Also, while the Chicago Manual of Style recommends it, some other online
>> >> grammar sites mention that it is American English style, but British
>> >> English would not add a comma afterwards.
>>
>> My feeling is consistent with that.  I'm British, and I'd say there are
>> lots of cases where it is more natural (to me) not to have a comma after
>> "i.e." or "e.g.".
>>
>
> This is the crux of the argument.  Should the GNU Guile manual be
> written using British English or American English, both in grammar and
> spelling?  American English usage rules require a comma, while British
> English requires that there not to be a comma.  There needs to be a
> decision about which set of usage rules should be used in the primary
> version of the manual, and then differences can be resolved in
> translations.  But whichever is decided, it should not be "use a comma
> if you feel it's needed; otherwise, leave it out."  Reference manuals
> are not the place for personal style.  Let's leave that for tutorials.
>

While I agree that a consistent style is desirable for a manual, I
just wanted to point out that the issue at hand is definitely not a
British vs. American English debate.
For example, although he has nothing to say on the matter (that I
could find), you'll notice that H.W. Fowler quite consistently uses a
comma after "i.e." and "e.g." in his book, "The King's English" [0].
I sincerely doubt that anyone would dare to call his English
Americanised.

Personally, although it's neither here nor there, I'm pro-comma and
most definitely en_GB.
Francis


[0] - http://www.bartleby.com/116/213.html (An arbitrary page, but if
you search it for "i.e." you'll see the comma.)