RE: [cgmo-webcgm] Just some typos

[Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>]

At 09:28 AM 11/4/2005 -0700, Robert Orosz wrote:
>[...]
>That is correct.  "Gray" is the American spelling according to the Compact
>OED, and "grey" is the British spelling.  The CGM standard is written in the
>Queen's English, so that is probably why that change was made between 1992
>and 1999, i.e. for consistency.

Close, but not quite.  This is totally unimportant, but I'm somewhat idle 
today, so ....  There are actually *three* relevant versions of the 
language:  American, International English, British ("Queen's").  Examples:

Am: color
Int: colour
Brit:  colour

Am:  normalize
Int: normalize
Brit: normalise

OED lists the "Int" variants as preferred, and "Brit" as "British variant".

ISO standards are supposed to be written in (preferred) International 
English.  (This cause some amusement during CGM editing, when some British 
members, who prided themselves as the keepers of and experts on the English 
Language, insisted on "normalise", and all similar "ize" words, and lost.)

WebCGM.  Where it has a direct normative tie in to normative content of 
CGM:1999, it should stick with CGM:1999's International.  I.e., the name of 
the element is BACKGROUND COLOUR (in the PPF), and in the MetDesc (PPF) it 
says "ColourClass:", etc.  In descriptive prose or WebCGM-discretionary 
stuff, it tends towards American, e.g., "These include such information as 
picture size and scaling, specification modes for aspects such as line 
width, and background color" (Sec2.1).  Interestingly, W3C (very 
international, right?), uses "color" in SVG.

I'm sure you'll find exceptions.

-Lofton.


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Dieter Weidenbrück [mailto:dieter@itedo.com]
>Sent: Friday, November 04, 2005 9:23 AM
>To: 'Robert Orosz'; 'Lofton Henderson'; 'Cruikshank, David W'
>Cc: 'CGM Open WebCGM TC'
>Subject: RE: [cgmo-webcgm] Just some typos
>
>
>Lofton,
>
>somehow I seem to remember that spelling is following British English rules
>vs. American English. Probably this is where these differences come from?
>
>(should affect also colour vs. color and similar cases)
>
>Dieter
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robert Orosz [mailto:roboro@AUTO-TROL.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 11:42 PM
> > To: 'Lofton Henderson'; Cruikshank, David W
> > Cc: CGM Open WebCGM TC
> > Subject: RE: [cgmo-webcgm] Just some typos
> >
> > Lofton,
> >
> > To answer your first question, yes I agree that we should
> > change WebCGM 2.0 MP uniformly to use "greyscale".  In fact,
> > I did exactly that when I took on that action item to review
> > WebCGM 2.0 MP for accuracy.  That's how it got to be
> > "greyscale" in the first place which triggered Dave's
> > question about changing it to "grayscale".
> >
> > Regarding your second question, I would just correct the text
> > to align with
> > CGM:1999 and otherwise leave it alone.  I think you are
> > probably correct about gr[ae]yscale being virtually unused.
> >
> > Rob
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lofton Henderson [mailto:lofton@rockynet.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 3:07 PM
> > To: Robert Orosz; Cruikshank, David W
> > Cc: CGM Open WebCGM TC
> > Subject: RE: [cgmo-webcgm] Just some typos
> >
> >
> > [Implementers, this affects you -- please have a look at the end...]
> >
> > At 11:46 AM 11/3/2005 -0700, Robert Orosz wrote:
> > >Lofton,
> > >
> > >Regarding "implementor" versus "implementer" the Compact
> > Oxford English
> > >dictionary votes for the latter.  See http://www.askoxford.com/
> >
> > Thanks.  (Good reference.)
> >
> >
> > >Regarding "gray" versus "grey" both spellings are
> > acceptable.  However,
> > >I only found the "gray" variation used once in CGM:1999 on page 92.
> > >Everywhere else, e.g. T.14.1 of the Model Profile, I find the "grey"
> > >variation.  Where in that document did you find "grayscale"?
> >
> > Oops, we have here some more divergence between WebCGM (and
> > ATA) MP versus ISO CGM MP.  Below is based on REC WebCGM 1.0
> > MP text, and (printed) ISO
> > CGM:1999 text.
> >
> > T.14.1:
> > WebCGM---grayscale
> > 1999---greyscale
> >
> > T.16.2:
> > WebCGM---grayscale
> > 1999---greyscale
> >
> > T.16.9:
> > WebCGM---grayscale
> > 1999---greyscale
> >
> > T.20.34:
> > WebCGM---grayscale
> > 1999---greyscale
> >
> > T.26.3:
> > WebCGM---grayscale
> > 1999---greyscale
> >
> > Attachment 26.3:
> > WebCGM---grayscale
> > 1999---greyscale
> >
> > This is probably another artifact of the re-edit of the ISO
> > CGM MP between
> > 1992 and 1999.  Therefore, as before, the ISO CGM:1999 MP is
> > the normative reference.  So I think that we need to change
> > WebCGM 2.0 MP uniformly to use "greyscale".
> >
> > QUESTION.  Agreed?
> >
> > (Note.  As I read the MP, only T.16.2 is a normative
> > specification of content.  The other occurrences are prose
> > references to category, which have no normative instantiation
> > in WebCGM except in T.16.2.)
> >
> > QUESTION.  Should T.16.2 have a note about history of grey
> > vs. gray ('92
> > Amd.2 vs. '99) and recommend that viewers be tolerant?  Or
> > (since I'm guessing grey/grayscale is virtually unused),
> > should we just correct the text to align with CGM:1999 and
> > otherwise leave it alone?
> >
> > -Lofton.
> >
> >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Lofton Henderson [mailto:lofton@rockynet.com]
> > >Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 11:13 AM
> > >To: Cruikshank, David W; CGM Open WebCGM TC
> > >Subject: Re: [cgmo-webcgm] Just some typos
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >At 04:04 PM 11/1/2005 -0800, Cruikshank, David W wrote:
> > > >My review of WebCGM 1.0 - 10/27 version - typos.
> > >
> > >3 comments/questions...
> > >
> > >
> > >"Notices - first para, change implementors to implementers"
> > -- I have
> > >one spell checker (Amaya) that accepts both.  I have another
> > (Eudora)
> > >that rejects both.  Anyone know about this word?
> > >
> > >"...WebCGMString... vs WebCGMstring kind of stuff" -- I found two
> > >occurrences of "WebCGMstring" and changed to "WebCGMString".
> > >
> > >"T20.34 COLOUR TABLE model profile entry, should Greyscale be
> > >Grayscale?"  CGM:1999 says "grayscale" for the entry for
> > MetDesc, and
> > >this is the only normative usage -- the value in the ColourClass
> > >substring.  Therefore I changed any occurrences of "grey" to "gray"
> > >(all such occurrences are editorial, occurring in prose
> > references to
> > >the value selected by the MetDesc parameter value.)
> > >
> > >-Lofton.
> >
> >