Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #3036

Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search)

From Lew <lew@lewscanon.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search)
Date 2011-04-11 13:48 -0700
Organization http://groups.google.com
Message-ID <eea54a30-ed34-4bfc-b3d0-1bd9af1c0ef7@v10g2000yqn.googlegroups.com> (permalink)
References (2 earlier) <inb0bd$gsn$1@dont-email.me> <inielt$uok$1@news.albasani.net> <90gfdtFmkU2@mid.individual.net> <e380412e-ebc2-440d-96f4-4fc814c6f49b@i14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com> <HOOdndwQGZv8zz7QnZ2dnUVZ87-dnZ2d@telenor.com>

Show all headers | View raw


Leif Roar Moldskred wrote:
> Lew wrote:
>> But not "K" or "T".

> That's a matter of style: some style guides recommend the use of an
> apostrophe to mark plurals of individual letters, some do not.
> See "Eat, Shoots & Leaves -- The zero tolerance approach to
> punctuation" by Lynne Truss for a funny but in-depth discussion of
> the uses of apostrophes.
>

Yes, it is a matter of style.  Duh.  That's why I cited a *style*
guide.  There's a direct correlation there.

Yes, styles vary.  The question was for *an* authority to support the
style I follow.  As you say, some support what I suggest and some do
not.  I follow the ones that do.

I don't follow every style, nor can one, given that they don't always
agree.

Personally I find the "greengrocer's comma" to distract and diminish
from the communication, so the style guide I follow concords with that
assessment.

YMMV.

--
Lew

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar


Thread

Re: Binary Search Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-04-02 22:00 +1300
  Re: Binary Search Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-04-02 05:07 -0500
    Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 07:59 -0700
      Re: Binary Search Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-04-02 10:37 -0500
        Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 08:57 -0700
          Re: Binary Search Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-04-03 12:40 +1200
  Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 07:58 -0700
    Re: Binary Search Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-02 11:11 -0400
      Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 08:58 -0700
    Re: Binary Search Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-03 00:11 +0100
      Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 16:52 -0700
        Re: Binary Search Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-03 18:50 +0100
          Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-03 12:01 -0700
            Re: Binary Search Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-03 22:39 +0100
              Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-03 16:37 -0700
                Re: Binary Search Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-06 15:24 -0400
                OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm@myrealbox.com> - 2011-04-11 13:53 +0000
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-11 11:45 -0700
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-04-11 14:11 -0500
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-11 13:48 -0700
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-11 22:16 +0100
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-11 17:54 -0400
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-11 23:35 +0100
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-04-11 21:41 -0500
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm@myrealbox.com> - 2011-04-14 10:11 +0000
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Jerry Gerrone <scuzwalla@gmail.com> - 2011-04-14 20:12 -0700
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-04-26 22:53 +0100
      Re: Binary Search Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-04-05 16:01 +0100

csiph-web