Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:24:47 -0800 From: Stanislav Sedov <stas@FreeBSD.org> To: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r201477 - head/games/fortune/datfiles Message-ID: <20100105162447.7deac6d7.stas@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4B43D346.4020900@FreeBSD.org> References: <201001040916.o049GZ1Y013061@svn.freebsd.org> <4B4384E3.2080600@FreeBSD.org> <20100105152300.eb7a66d1.stas@FreeBSD.org> <4B43D346.4020900@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Signature=_Tue__5_Jan_2010_16_24_47_-0800_.By98Nb8oPcr5+BP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:03:18 -0800 Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> mentioned: > Stanislav Sedov wrote: > > Thanks for suggestions! >=20 > And thank you for making the changes. :) >=20 > > What's regarding the "there're" spelling --- I'm not sure what the > > correct version is: I took this quote from the San Francisco > > Chronicle newspaper, and it saved the original spelling. >=20 > Couple of things regarding that. First, "there're" is very far from > being a common English construction, especially in formal speech such > as the context of this quote. Second, I found numerous citations that > have it spelled out on line, I didn't find any that had the > contraction (although I admit that I did not do an exhaustive search). > Finally, the chronicle is not who I would choose to be objective in > regards to a quotation from someone with whom they share an opposite > political viewpoint. :) Yeah, true :-) >=20 > In regards to what you appended to the date, "On" would be fine, after > thinking about it "Regarding" would probably be more clear. Either way > it should be capitalized. The "to" should definitely be changed to > "of" however, for proper English'ification. Hmm, I'm not by any means the English language expert [just learning], but isn't "invasion of" in this context is somewhat vague? I mean, from what I see from dictionaries "invasion of smth" could mean both the action by smth, and action against smth. Is "invasion to" grammatically incorrect? BTW, why it should be capitalized, it's not a start of a sentence? >=20 > I'm happy to make the changes if you'd rather, since I realize that > it's annoying having to fix grammar nits, especially about something > as trivial as the fortune files. :) >=20 Yeah, please do. I'm clearly not competent enough at this area. --=20 Stanislav Sedov ST4096-RIPE --Signature=_Tue__5_Jan_2010_16_24_47_-0800_.By98Nb8oPcr5+BP Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJLQ9hPAAoJEL8lojEJL9nwgzAP/1Te58ZNxo6/AyBaZ+jHS3vv WNaoxc/Cow0MIwEZMYuq4vdb5eSG4FcxbokPys1mUE7Xn4ISmW2xtHY1FU8zRHUZ sUnIb9dFCKslXMfERAnIP5qq0006BCr6VLmnIEKopOf2nloDo5turVKSyV3acOiY BbDnFfWTn04hfUfcVB8ciolUmKBNMl2mSpHEpEQ2HGDyIiYGxDIqL1JaEgSDziGX BOPZQdu30YBQ8rTgxfRQmn0s3nmJlm/rzqKCi1PRxq7XAm0MHLpmk29MJ3MAdwHU XzVtXN3Xk91vkM0ywQDlnE1p3RUVlz4sMs0BOQP1l+MGtfQJfEBwaon5eKPsjlsW shvyIQh93n3Oum8VCI20DgGh3TNI8ShGCnygmrxlI1nSBOqo7I3QuVMmUkGIYqTJ UYSeTa3Zuiga6phtRq0c56CcwT1RLHGOmDwrUfPJiB4PnwkgJDRMId3KJJD7B19T CGI6gvonCaQMOduShp9ogqe2CgvfDWAi3Y1HTtVmcqKixefTLxQmZodxOxZBXPCo CU49Rd+djm2EUiJaLvQMAJeZ1/DGI3e0bUZQw+8CiO6iIoT456m4KMGia/sGmIJ7 C7TQDXHwkhNY+vINMzEZipHQ8FGXp45ESKcg9JgPASXC+oCRnEqAJcEjp7VQCCIc VMoX1gvlqly3yonozKu7 =+Jem -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Signature=_Tue__5_Jan_2010_16_24_47_-0800_.By98Nb8oPcr5+BP--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100105162447.7deac6d7.stas>