[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [relax-ng] grammar error in compatibility spec
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>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC