Re: Doc patch "only relevant" -> "relevant only" - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: Doc patch "only relevant" -> "relevant only"
Date
Msg-id 507EB07E.3050409@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Doc patch "only relevant" -> "relevant only"  ("Karl O. Pinc" <kop@meme.com>)
Responses Re: Doc patch "only relevant" -> "relevant only"  (Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 10/16/2012 11:24 PM, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As long as I'm sending in trivial fixes
> to the docs here's a bit of wording that's been bugging me.
>
> In a number of places the docs read "only relevant",
> this patch reverses this to read "relevant only".
>
> I believe this reads better because it quickly
> answers the question "is what?" with "is relevant",
> making the sentence less of a strain to read.
> "Only relevant" would be better if you really wanted
> to emphasize the "only", which I don't think is called
> for.
>
> (Sending in such trivial patches makes me feel like
> I'm bikeshedding.  Feel free to ignore them without comment.)
>
>

This doesn't appear to correct any ambiguity, nor any grammatical error. 
I find these sentences perfectly readable as they are. Not everything in 
the docs conforms to my personal style either, but I'm not in favor of 
taking this sort of patch which is just a matter of substituting your 
stylistic judgment for that for the original author. If we do that we'll 
never stop.

cheers

andrew



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #7534: walreceiver takes long time to detect n/w breakdown
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: timezone change not in changelog ?