On 16 May 2013 17:33, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> writes:
>> Someone added a comment to the docs mentioning that an example
>> attempting to use a well-known panagram is actually not the intended
>> panagram. They also point out that this isn't important, but it's
>> still probably wrong.
>
> At least it would grate on somebody's nerves once they'd noticed it.
> Fixed in HEAD.
Thanks Tom.
Also, s/panagram/pangram/ in my own email.
Thom