[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: staves not staffs

From: David Raleigh Arnold
Subject: Re: staves not staffs
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 12:55:27 -0400

On Thursday 07 August 2003 10:35 am, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> address@hidden writes:
> > In the manual "cheat sheet".
> >
> > I guess you just have to search and replace
> > staffs with staves once in a while.  Why does
> > this keep happening?  It might not hurt to
> > put in the glossary that staves is the plural
> > of staff.
> Yes,
> or I could just type away, and wait for you guys to find all the
> errors (works like a charm :-).
> Fixed now in CVS.

I forgot to mention that the singular "stave" is perfectly
ok.  It's in the HDM as "Staff or stave".  Oops--Where's
the glossary?
> > "The Name is Pond" is fun for a while.  DaveA
> (?)
> Is this positive or negative (i.e. it gets cheesy after a while?)

Someone else criticized it somewhat harshly, otherwise I would
have written nothing.  I would be disappointed if it were still
there years from now is all.  It's fine now.  I like it.  Wait until it 
begins to stink before you roll it over.  DaveA

The biggest losers of all are the winners of an unjust war.  Bush lied.
Thousands died.  Only the winning part is over.  It is necessary that
WMD be found, so they will be.      darnold4 at cox.net

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]