Re: Doc: CG Clarifying about Examples with overrides (issue 7013043)

[dak]

https://codereview.appspot.com/7013043/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/doc-work.itexi
File Documentation/contributor/doc-work.itexi (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/7013043/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/doc-work.itexi#newcode155
Documentation/contributor/doc-work.itexi:155: The correct way to add
[changes like this] to the documentation is to
On 2012/12/26 07:32:01, J_lowe wrote:
> On 2012/12/25 09:10:01, bealingsplayfordnews wrote:
> > Why the [] ?

> This is a standard way to to clarify the antecedent. Also you will see
it used
> to denote missing text [ ... ] or more commonly to denote a mistake or
> inaccuracy in a quote without it being attributed to the author of the
text it
> is being quoted in (i.e '[sic]').

> Anyway, enough of that, I have rewritten the sentence.

Actually, the _only_ usage of [...] I know in text passages is an
editorial addition, signifying material added by someone different from
the original author.  In particular, "[sic]" means "as the editor, I am
perfectly aware that this is wrong, thank you very much.  But since this
is a literal quotation, I am not at liberty correcting it."

Another frequent use is to make explicit what object a pronoun in a
quoted section is referring to if the scope of the quotation does not
allow deducing it.  Also, when only sentence parts are quoted and the
result would be ungrammatical, editorial insertions used for creating a
grammatical sentence again will be marked with [...].

https://codereview.appspot.com/7013043/