Horton

Thread

Commits

  1. Doc: get rid of <foreignphrase> tags.

  1. get rid of <foreignphrase> tags in the docs?

    John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com> — 2021-02-04T15:02:08Z

    Hi,

While looking at the proposed removal of the v2 protocol, I noticed that we
italicize some, but not all, instances of 'per se', 'pro forma', and 'ad
hoc'. I'd say these are widespread enough in formal registers of English
that they hardly need to be called out as foreign, so I propose removing
the tags for those words. Alternatively, we could just add tags to make
existing usage consistent, but I have little reason to think it will stay
that way. It's also impractical to go and search for other possible words
that should have been italicized but weren't.

The other case is 'voilà', found in rules.sgml. The case for italics here
is stronger, but looking at that file, I actually think a more
generic-sounding phrase here would be preferable.

Other opinions?

-- 
John Naylor
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

  2. Re: get rid of <foreignphrase> tags in the docs?

    Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2021-02-04T15:31:49Z

    John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> While looking at the proposed removal of the v2 protocol, I noticed that we
> italicize some, but not all, instances of 'per se', 'pro forma', and 'ad
> hoc'. I'd say these are widespread enough in formal registers of English
> that they hardly need to be called out as foreign, so I propose removing
> the tags for those words.

+1, nobody italicizes those in normal usage.

> The other case is 'voilà', found in rules.sgml. The case for italics here
> is stronger, but looking at that file, I actually think a more
> generic-sounding phrase here would be preferable.

Yeah, seeing that we only use that in one place, I think we could do
without it.  Looks like something as pedestrian as "The results are:"
would do fine.

			regards, tom lane

  3. Re: get rid of <foreignphrase> tags in the docs?

    John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com> — 2021-03-10T13:47:35Z

    On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 11:31 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> > While looking at the proposed removal of the v2 protocol, I noticed
that we
> > italicize some, but not all, instances of 'per se', 'pro forma', and 'ad
> > hoc'. I'd say these are widespread enough in formal registers of English
> > that they hardly need to be called out as foreign, so I propose removing
> > the tags for those words.
>
> +1, nobody italicizes those in normal usage.

Now that protocol v2 is gone, here's a patch to remove those tags.

> > The other case is 'voilà', found in rules.sgml. The case for italics
here
> > is stronger, but looking at that file, I actually think a more
> > generic-sounding phrase here would be preferable.
>
> Yeah, seeing that we only use that in one place, I think we could do
> without it.  Looks like something as pedestrian as "The results are:"
> would do fine.

Done that way.

--
John Naylor
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

  4. Re: get rid of <foreignphrase> tags in the docs?

    Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2021-03-10T17:39:19Z

    John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 11:31 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> +1, nobody italicizes those in normal usage.

> Now that protocol v2 is gone, here's a patch to remove those tags.

Pushed.

			regards, tom lane