Re: Avoid Lisp and Scheme in the same list

[Tino Calancha]

>   It reads weird Lisp and Scheme in the same list with
>   the other languages: for instance, in that list,
>   Lisp and Python looks two independent categories, but
>   Scheme is a subcategory of Lisp.
>   I prefer to introduce Scheme in the next sentence as
>   follows:
>
> I don't see what the new wording makes clearer, rather I think it
> makes it unclear.  The list specifies _languages_, Lisp being one (GNU
> Emacs Lisp and Common Lisp being the ones refered to), and Scheme
> being another.  Not language "categories".

Thank you for your e-mail.
IMHO my suggestion is more clear and the list shows a better logical
structure.  Certainy my wording can be improved by native english 
speakers, but that is not the main point that i am addressing:

Scheme is a Lisp dialect, Python not; that is what i meant by categories.
The logical relation between elements in the list is not symmetric
including Scheme: there is one that relates specially with another.

As it is written now, it could also be (why not?):
"Lisp, Scheme, Guile, Python, Ruby, and Java".

I prefer going from the general to the particular: first list elements
entering in the same foot, and then we can mention about Scheme (dialect
of Lisp) and furthermore introduce Guile (implementation/dialect of 
Scheme).