Re: [sv-ac] SV-AC: "Which" for "tha"t editing changes

Shalom,
1) For sections 16 and 17 (assertions and checkers) I would like to have
those corrected. I feel that proper grammar should be used in a polished
document, particularly of IEEE standard. As an author of several books, I
feel very strongly on this. If other committees do not want to go over
their work on this issue, that is their responsibility, unless they are
directed to do so. On sections 16 and 17, the mantis is already written,
and I would like to have those minor text editing changes implemented.

2) Going over the many "which" in the document is not as tedious a you
think. PDF allows you to do a search of the pronoun "which", and when
found, it is very easy to determine proper, or improper usage For example,
all the "in which" or "at which" or "whichever", or
"bla-bla, which ..... , bla-bla" is mostly OK; a quick read can determine
the proper usage of "which". However, sentences like "the bla-bla which
does bla-bla" is not proper, and can quickly be detected. This is the
process I used for sections 16 and 17.
See http://www.grammarbook.com/grammar/whoVwhVt.asp on the usage of "which"
vs "that"

3) This is a lull time, in that we're reviewing draft 4 and are not longer
addressing new technical issues. I believe that we should take advantage
of this time to have every group check such grammar; it is not a long
process. Let's get the LRM polished in more ways than just technical.

This is my two cents.
Regards,
Ben Cohen

On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Bresticker, Shalom <
shalom.bresticker@intel.com> wrote:

> Ben,
>
> I don't believe it is a good investment of time to go checking every use
> of 'that' and 'which'.
>
> First, there are just so many. I found over 3700 instances of either word
> in the document.
>
> In practice, this is a grammar rule that is less important than many
> others.
> Speakers use the words interchangeably and don't imply or infer a
> different meaning depending on which of these two words is used.
> The Chicago Manual of Style also notes, "In British English, writers and
> editors seldom observe the distinction between the two words." (section
> 5.220)
>
> Of course, if we do spot misuses, we should of course try to correct them.
>
> Regards,
> Shalom
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Neil Korpusik [mailto:neil.korpusik@oracle.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 3:06 AM
> > To: ben@systemverilog.us
> > Cc: Bresticker, Shalom; sv-ac@eda-stds.org; Korchemny, Dmitry;
> > stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
> > Subject: Re: [sv-ac] SV-AC: "Which" for "tha"t editing changes
> >
> > Hi Ben,
> >
> > There isn't a defined process for finding such problems.
> > We simply fix these types of things when we find them.
> >
> >
> > Neil
> >
> >
> >
> > On 01/04/12 12:36, ben cohen wrote:
> > > I filed http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/view.php?id=4002
> > > Shalom, what is the process to have all the committees review their
> > > sections for such errors.
> > > It would be best have a professional IEEE document with good grammar.
> > >
> > > Summary 0004002: "Which" for "tha"t editing changes for AL OF LRM
> > > Description The LRM has several grammatical errors, with the most
> > > striking one being the misuse of the pronouns "which" and "that"
> > > Attached is mantis for recommended editing changes for sections 16
> > and 17.
> > >
> > > *However, ALL of the LRM needs to be reviewed,
> > > and each responsible committee should review their sections for
> > proper
> > > grammar.*
> > >
> > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Intel Israel (74) Limited
>
> This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
> the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
> by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
>
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.