Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 21:54:04 +0100 From: gregoryd.freebsd@free.fr To: keramida@FreeBSD.org Cc: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org, keramida@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: docs/119463: [handbook] [patch] typo in printing/chapter.sgml Message-ID: <1200344044.478bcbecb1228@imp.free.fr> In-Reply-To: <200801141342.m0EDgjCB069055@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <200801141342.m0EDgjCB069055@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting keramida@FreeBSD.org: > - <para>You should also specify the <literal>rw</literal> capability; > - that tells <application>LPD</application> to open the printer in > - read-write mode.</para> > + <para>You should also specify the <literal>rw</literal> capability. > + When this capability is present, <application>LPD</application> > + opens the printer in read-write mode.</para> > > Does this look better? I guess we should avoid the repetition of "capability", though (the fdp-primer, "writing style" invites us to). What do you think of something like: " When present, it tells LPD to open the printer in r/w mode". My, I'm starting to feel like a fussy guy, now... :-\ (By the way, I read the "that" as a relative, and did not realise the ";" could be used to separate the two sentences and make "that" a demonstrative). gregory
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1200344044.478bcbecb1228>