| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | devguy(dot)ca(at)gmail(dot)com, "pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: inappropriate word 'victim' |
| Date: | 2017-10-03 20:29:34 |
| Message-ID: | 0d692205-5ec3-55aa-51cb-d029eb93cd12@commandprompt.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On 10/03/2017 01:28 PM, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com
> My first inclination was "target" though I suppose its not that much
> closer to the supposed neutral position on this subjective scale than
> "victim".
>
> Subject didn't sound right either (marginally). Maybe "named" -
> "...while connected to the named database."
>
> Given that, aside from 3 release note instances, we never use the word
> "victim" in the docs leads me to want to change this if just for
> internal consistency.
Named is probably the best middle ground.
JD
>
> David J.
>
--
Command Prompt, Inc. || http://the.postgres.company/ || @cmdpromptinc
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Advocate: @amplifypostgres || Learn: https://pgconf.us
***** Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own. *****
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Erik Rijkers | 2017-10-03 20:36:22 | Re: inappropriate word 'victim' |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2017-10-03 20:28:35 | Re: inappropriate word 'victim' |