On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 at 12:27, David G. Johnston
wrote:
> On Monday, April 21, 2025, David Rowley wrote:
>> Does anyone have any opinion on the wording I'm proposing in the attached?
>
> I like it. It removes the problematic wording and moves the reference to
> —all closer to the front to aid in
On Monday, April 21, 2025, David Rowley wrote:
>
> Does anyone have any opinion on the wording I'm proposing in the attached?
>
I like it. It removes the problematic wording and moves the reference to
—all closer to the front to aid in skimming.
David J.
On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 at 08:53, Noboru Saito wrote:
> Regarding "to to" and "that that", I agree that they might be
> technically acceptable.
> However, I personally find them a bit harder to parse and they
> increase the chance of misreading for me.
> Your suggested alternative for "to to" is much
Thank you for the review! I appreciate your detailed feedback.
Regarding "to to" and "that that", I agree that they might be
technically acceptable.
However, I personally find them a bit harder to parse and they
increase the chance of misreading for me.
Your suggested alternative for "to to" is mu
On Mon, 21 Apr 2025 at 15:06, Noboru Saito wrote:
> 1. Remove unnecessary blank lines (blankline.diff)
Looks good.
> 2. Fix repeated "to to" in several command reference files (toto.diff)
-Specifies the name of the database to connect to to discover which
+Specifies the name of
Hi PostgreSQL Hackers,
I'm a member of the PostgreSQL Japanese documentation translation
team. While working on translations,
I've identified several minor grammatical and formatting issues in the
English documentation.
Please review them.
1. Remove unnecessary blank lines (blankline.diff)
2. Fix
