From owner-cvs-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 7 10:04:12 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-doc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A89E537B40C for ; Wed, 7 May 2003 10:04:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail15.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.215]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E292043FE0 for ; Wed, 7 May 2003 10:04:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 31701 invoked from network); 7 May 2003 17:04:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO server.baldwin.cx) ([216.27.160.63]) (envelope-sender )encrypted SMTP for ; 7 May 2003 17:04:10 -0000 Received: from laptop.baldwin.cx ([216.133.140.1]) by server.baldwin.cx (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h47H43p0005324; Wed, 7 May 2003 13:04:03 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.5.4 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20030507084829.GB15496@HAL9000.homeunix.com> Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 13:04:10 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin To: David Schultz cc: Tom Rhodes cc: Doug Barton cc: des@FreeBSD.ORG cc: Hiten Pandya cc: doc-committers@FreeBSD.ORG cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG cc: cvs-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/disks chapter.sgml X-BeenThere: cvs-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the doc and www trees List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 17:04:13 -0000 On 07-May-2003 David Schultz wrote: > On Wed, May 07, 2003, Hiten Pandya wrote: >> On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 11:00:18PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: >> > > Actually, and according to my dictionary, irrelevant is more correct >> > > here. >> > >> > That wasn't my actual question. :) Let me rephrase. "Given that these two >> > words basically mean the same thing in context, what was the overwhelming >> > necessity of this change?" If the reason was, "To make the meaning >> > slightly more accurate," then we can argue the merits based on that... I'm >> > just curious. >> >> Two reasons: >> >> a) Use simple english which everyone can understand. >> Many people from the far east etc do not understand such >> words, while they can undersand ``useless'' or >> ''irrelevant''. This is also the same reason for my >> "automatic to automagic" change. >> >> b) The 'insignificant' meaning of the word `moot' is >> secondary, while it's primary meaning is the opposite > > I don't think that there's any requirement that FreeBSD > documentation read like a Henry James novel. Some people have > colorful writing styles that involve words such as > ``automagical'', ``moot'', and ``kludge'', and I'm not convinced > that this is a problem. Documentation isn't my domain, so I won't > stick my nose into this any further, but unless our translators > and other non-native English speakers have major qualms about > this kind of detail, I do consider this to be gratuitous. Agreed. automagical is a favorite word of several folks and does have a slightly different connotation from just 'automatic'. :) -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/