On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Ian Jackson
<ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Lars Kurth writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH SECURITY-POLICY 3/9] Deployment
> with Security Team Permission"):
>> On 19 Jan 2015, at 10:20, Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote:
>> > On 16.01.15 at 20:52, <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>> >> +<p>List members may, if (and only if) the Security Team grants
>> >> +permission, deploy fixed versions during the embargo. Permission for
>>
>> Better: List members may deploy fixed versions during the embargo, if (...)
>
> The reason I didn't write it like that is that someone who reads only
> the first part of the sentence might not see the caveat.
>
> Is my wording unclear ?
I think it's just a less common grammatical construct (splitting "may
do X" into "may, if Y, do X"), and so perhaps a bit more difficult for
non-native speakers to parse? But I think that probably in this case,
while it might take a bit more effort to read for some, the risk of
someone actually misunderstanding your wording is low; while the risk
of someone missing the caveat in the other wording is much more
dangerous. So I'd leave it the way it is.
-George
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
