Re: readability changes to postgres.sgml

On 8/15/19 10:22 PM, Erik Rijkers wrote:
> On 2019-08-16 02:26, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> Greetings,
>>
>> * Joshua D. Drake (jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com) wrote:
>>> attached
>
>> they seem to be simply removing words and removing content that is
>
> For what it's worth, I think the proposed changes are all solid
> improvements. The text reads better with them, and that's what this is
> about -- not whether the removed little text-pieces were 'true' or not.

Correct, the point of these patches is to make the documentation
succinct and hopefully more clear. Any writing class you take will tell
you that the less words you can use to make the point, the better.
Further, language interpretation changes over time and certain
adjectives will not have the impact they once did. As I have been
reviewing the docs, the language used although correct is often clumsy.

>
> However, there is one typo:
>
> +    read independently.  There are many extrernal programming
>
> extrernal -> external
> (and I would say that dropping that word 'external' would be another
> little improvement)
>

Good catch, should I submit a new patch or will it be fixed if applied?

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. || http://the.postgres.company/ || @cmdpromptinc
Postgres centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Advocate: @amplifypostgres || Get help: https://commandprompt.com/
***** Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own. *****