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

"signalling" vs "signaling"

I'm told you have unilaterally decided to change the spelling of
"signalled" to "signaled" and the spelling of "signalling" to "signaling".

I want you to be aware that the very idea that you might do this 
upsets me personally a great deal.

The spelling of these words was discussed at length by the condition
handling committee. It was the group's consensus to use that spelling.

The dictionary by my desk at this moment ("Merriam-Webster; Webster's
Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary") says that either spelling is equally
correct. At the time of the discussion in the error handling committee,
several people cited other references to American dictionaries which
gave the two spellings equal status.

The spelling issue came up again a while back on CL-Editorial and it
was determined that the current spelling is fine.

Given that several respected authorities (dictionaries) agree that this
issue is a matter of individual preference, and not a matter of 
right vs wrong, the issue comes down to the more subjective issues of
"status quo" and "personal respect".

Status quo gets involved because the error system which is the father
of this error system, the Symbolics error system, spells these words
with a double-L.  I believe that this early precedent should have some

Personal respect becomes involved because as an individual I have invested
a large amount of time in the error system, and I feel that in the case
of a border-line call like this, I should have earned some say.  The fact
that you're the last person to have his hands on this document before it
goes out to ISO does not impress me--might does not always make right in
these situations.

I think that it must be true that if the roles were reversed and I made
a similar play to change something in the presentation of CLOS without
your approval, you would react as I am now reacting. Indeed, nearly
every change to any CLOS-related wording that I have suggested to Kathy
has been accompanied by a phrase like "run this by RPG and/or Moon
first, just to be sure"--not always because I am unsure of my technical
opinion, but sometimes just because I don't think it's my place to be
making such decisions behind your back.  If this were an issue of clear
right-vs-wrong, I would yield to the clearly right answer. And I think
you would, too.  But if it was a case where there was a credible source
backing up a particular decision, I think you would want some say in how
CLOS was presented as part of your due for having put in your time on
creating it.  Please afford me similar respect in this situation.

Please use the double-L spellings, and don't make us waste further time
at this critical juncture when all our times are better spent on more
important aspects of the document.