Re: [PATCH] Conform to O'Reilly style guide

On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 11:23:04AM -0800, rbb@rkbloom.net wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Michael Price wrote:
> > Paul Lussier writes:
>...
> > > As for 'can not' vs. 'cannot' my prefererence is for the former vs.
> > > the latter, but either is acceptable according to Webster's :)
> >
> > http://www.oreilly.com/oreilly/author/stylesheet.html#C
>
> For completeness, I researched the differences between cannot and can not
> when I was writing by book. I had a more definition URL at the time, but
> this says the same thing.
>
> http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/archives/9504/techwhirl-9504-00292.html
>
> Basically, cannot is almost always preferred unless you are trying to
> stress the _not_ as in: "You can run, but you can not hide." And, if you
> are using "can not only", then it should be three words, not two.

Or simply rewrite the frickin' sentence to obviate all discussion... :-)

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org