Hi, Tony! While there's been enough discussion on formatting, text
accuracy, etc., in the not-so-distant past to make one a bit paranoid, I
really don't think this type of error is a huge deal. It's one of those
areas where we'll all just have to continue to do the best we can. While a
lot of us on this list are admittedly perfectionists, yours truly included,
I'm afraid, readability is still the bottom line in most cases.
Jana
-Tony, I know this isn't your point, but I think dwarfs is as acceptable as dwarves these days. I found it that way in a book recently and left it alone. Of course, dwarfs as a verb is different from dwarfs as a noun, but that's another mater (smile).
Also, I found out when I was correcting Englis papers a few years back, fishes is now an acceptable plural, whereas when I was young (many years ago) the plural of fish was fish. Language changes, no always for the better, but I suppose in many cases it is toward the more sensible.
Cindy
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
