From owner-sc35wg4+sc35wg4-domo=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Fri Mar 9 01:26:28 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc35wg4-domo Delivered-To: sc35wg4-domo@www.open-std.org Received: by www.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id EE3FB35698C; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 01:26:27 +0100 (CET) Delivered-To: sc35wg4@open-std.org Received: from cutitan3.chiba-u.jp (cutitan.chiba-u.jp [133.82.251.69]) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FB99356940; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 01:26:25 +0100 (CET) Received: from cutitan3.chiba-u.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cutitan3.chiba-u.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B2D86108F5; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 09:26:22 +0900 (JST) X-Virus-Scanned: by SpamTitan at chiba-u.jp Received: from faculty.chiba-u.jp (cuacmsrv3.chiba-u.jp [172.26.13.4]) by cutitan3.chiba-u.jp (Postfix) with SMTP id 3A2726109FF; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 09:24:14 +0900 (JST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <20120309002414.00003557.0033@faculty.chiba-u.jp> Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 09:24:14 +0900 From: "Hiroaki IKEDA" To: "Andy Heath" , Reply-To: Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?B?QWxhaW5fTGFCb2506Q==?= , , , Subject: Re: (SC35WG4.15) (SC35WG1.326) WD 17549 (4-direction devices) English Question In-Reply-To: <20120308221932.F2048356973@www.open-std.org> References: <20120229034257.97BBD9DB114@www.open-std.org> <20120306155520.76861356945@www.open-std.org> <20120306220605.23A7F356941@www.open-std.org> <4F56BDDB.1060706@axelrod.plus.com> <20120307124800.20BBA356945@www.open-std.org> <20120307181203.148263569A2@www.open-std.org> <20120308221932.F2048356973@www.open-std.org> Content-Type: Text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 ORGANIZATION: Chiba University X-MAILER: Active! mail Sender: owner-sc35wg4@open-std.org Precedence: bulk Dear Andy, (let me re-send my answer from the correct source e-mail address) Thank you very much for your efforts of improving English. Please kindky review the Annex A for English improving. Tomorrow I will meet the co-editor over the Skype for further overall action. With best regards, Hiroaki IKEDA ----- Original Message ----- > Dear Professor Ikeda, > > does the Annex. A. need reviewing for English "improving" ? > Or should this be left alone as a document from an external source ? > > Kind regards > > andy > > > In the attached I've reviewed the english as requested and made > > extensive editorial modifications and comments. Almost all of the > > modifications are entirely editorial with just the odd one or two where > > I've suggested a small semantic change. > > > > In many cases I wasn't clear what was intended and so I commented to > > that effect and in some cases suggested several alternatives from which > > one can be selected. In some places I could make no sense at all of a > > few sentences so there was nothing I could do with it - in those cases > > I'm happy to review again and supply english text if some clarification > > of meaning can be made and the document marked up in some way so I can > > find them. > > > > I haven't yet tackled Annex A because I'm not sure of its context and > > whether its ok to modify it - if its text taken from some external study > > then is it ok to make modifications ? > > > > I hope this helps and am happy to look again at clarified parts > > identified to need a further look and also the Annex if its appropriate. > > > > Cheers > > > > andy > > > > Cheers > > andy > -- > __________________ > Andy Heath > http://axelafa.com > >