Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1tacnV-003avc-M3 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 15:37:42 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1tacnU-0017DL-IS for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 15:37:40 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1tackG-0011jW-Ta for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 15:34:20 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1tackE-000vhO-1r for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 15:34:19 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 50MFYGeV3691389; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 10:34:16 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: "David G. Johnston" cc: Daniel Gustafsson , Robin Dupret , PostgreSQL Developers Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix a tiny typo in the documentation In-reply-to: References: <267EF43C-5E96-4C59-90B0-71A6A8901E9F@yesql.se> <84F6DEF0-799E-456C-9E3B-5DA9E52500A2@yesql.se> Comments: In-reply-to "David G. Johnston" message dated "Wed, 22 Jan 2025 06:38:34 -0700" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <3691387.1737560056.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 10:34:16 -0500 Message-ID: <3691388.1737560056@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk "David G. Johnston" writes: > On Wednesday, January 22, 2025, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >> On 22 Jan 2025, at 11:23, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >>> On 22 Jan 2025, at 09:27, Robin Dupret wrote: >>>> - special provision: you must write >>>> + special provision you must write: >> Re-reading it I think both placements of ':' are grammatically correct (not >> being a native speaker might trick me). > The colon does belong after provision, not write. If the colon is > bothersome rewrite to avoid it altogether. But the status quo works for me. I agree: removing the colon from where it is is strictly worse. There should be some kind of pause or separation there. Conceivably we could do - special provision: you must write + special provision. You must write: But like David, I don't feel a need to change anything here. There are many places in our docs where we flow into a or similar block without punctuation, and most of them read just fine to me. regards, tom lane