RE: [relax-ng] grammar error in compatibility spec

[Michael Fitzgerald <mike@wyeast.net>]

The use of the past tense /were/ is grammatically correct, but there is
something going on with the sense of the sentence which I think Josh called
out correctly. I believe the key here lies in answering a question. If the
goals mentioned STILL apply to the present, as well as the past, that is,
the goals CONTINUE to stand as the basis for the restrictions, then the
sense might be better stated as "The goals in framing these restrictions are
as follows..."

Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: James Clark [mailto:jjc@jclark.com]
Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2001 4:32 AM
To: Josh Lubell; RNG List
Subject: Re: [relax-ng] grammar error in compatibility spec


Hmm. Maybe my grammatical instincts have been compromised by living too
long in a non-English speaking country, but the use of "were" seems correct
to me, since the process of framing (i.e. devising) the restrictions took
place in the past.

--On 29 November 2001 10:38 -0500 Josh Lubell <lubell@cme.nist.gov> wrote:

>
> I noticed a minor grammar error in the compatibility spec. I believe the
> sentence before the enumerated list at the end of section 1.3 should read
> "The goals in framing these restrictions are as follows:" rather than
> "...were as follows"
> Josh
>
> Joshua Lubell, NIST
> 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263
> Gaithersburg MD 20899-8263 USA
> (301) 975-3563
> lubell@nist.gov



----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>