Re: review of document-overview

Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: review of document-overview
> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:30:09 +0100
> 
> [...]
> 
>>> SECTION 1
>>>
>>> * "Ontologies are formalised" -> "Ontologies are formalized"
>>>
>>>   "W3C uses U.S. English (e.g., "standardise" should read
>>>   "standardize" and "behaviour" should read "behavior")."  --
>>>   http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#Spelling
>>>
>> Heh. +1 due to W3C's rules. I let you discuss the anglo-american issues
>> with Ian in a dark alley somewhere:-)
>>
>> As an aside: somebody really aware of the differences may have to go
>> through the other documents, too. I know I tend to use UK spelling
>> because that is what I learned at school but, then, with so much
>> American around me I simply got completely confused and I probably use a
>> mixture of the two:-(
> 
> You should have tried growing up in Canada, which had both British and
> American influences, and its own set of spelling rules to boot.

Really? Is there a separate Canadian spelling that is neither US nor
British? I know the vocabulary is different but I somehow thought that
the Canadians kept their Imperial heritage on that (like, afaik, the
Australians did)...

The complexities of English never cease to amaze me.

Ivan


> (Un)fortunately, I've been in this he-ar great USofA for so long that I'm
> mostly converted to 'Muricun spelling (but *not* grammar).
> 
> peter
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf