On 21/09/05, Gerrit Holl <gerrit(a)nl.linux.org> wrote:
Rowan Collins wrote:
On the other hand, since the aim of the project
is to make an
encyclopedia - to share knowledge - maybe all we need do is make sure
the text is understandable to most English-speaking readers.
No, it's not enuf. This mait be undestandabel, but cetanly not apropiat
for an anciclopedia!
No, obviously I agree - I was putting the point almost as Devil's
Advocate, rather than something I agree with personally. But I do
think that it's not as important an issue as some are suggesting -
most of the time, either "standard" (the US one or the British one)
will produce text equally fit for the purpose of distributing
encyclopedic information throughout the English-speaking world.
Ambiguous phrasing, obtuse phrases which (often inadvertently) hide
information, or lack thereof, repetition, redundancy, and other such
overly long, sesquipedalian, or floccinaucinihilipilificatious
constructions, are far more harmful than the odd wrong but
understandable spelling, whatever "standard" it is "wrong" according
[sorry, I got a bit carried away there; I plead tiredness ;)]
Rowan Collins BSc