DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Airbattle Games
HTML https://airbattle.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Wing Leader General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 3859--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: Vincent Lefavrais Date: November 15, 2019, 7:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Lee Brimmicombe-Wood link=topic=64.msg3858#msg3858
date=1573808909]
Vincent, we seem to have removed the Oxford comma from the order
of battle headers. I can't recall when we agreed this, but we
are currently in a proofing ping-pong tussle between you and
Rick on this issue. What's our definitive call on this?
[/quote]
Lee,
After having a look at the Victories 2nd Ed. and Eagles
scenarios, I'd say the decision during the Victories/Eagles
proofing was Oxford commas everywhere, except where space is at
a premium:
- In ADCs (background text as well as variants text)
- In OOB headers
I guess that sums it up.
#Post#: 3860--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: pilotofficerprune Date: November 15, 2019, 7:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Agreed.
#Post#: 3866--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: Rick McKown Date: November 15, 2019, 5:24 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi guys,
Not being difficult, just want to make sure I understand this
point since, unfortunately, I missed the earlier discussion
here.
When you say "except where space is at a premium", that could
reasonably be interpreted to mean (1) that the ban on using the
Oxford comma applies only in a situation with a specific ADC
text or OB title where "space" actually is "at a premium" (i.e.,
where the text is so tight that adding a comma would mess up the
text layout). I would say that this is basically the way that
I've approached the Oxford comma issue since, to the best of my
knowledge, space has not been "at a premium" in any of the WL:O
situations I noted.
However, it seems that the intended meaning (which is not quite
what the words say) is (2) that the ban on using the Oxford
comma applies to all ADC texts and all OB titles "by rule", no
matter how much space might actually be available in any
specific situation, presumably because, due to their restricted
layout, it can be expected that space will be "at a premium" for
some portion of the ADC texts and OB titles. Easy enough to
apply the rule.
Assuming that (2) is the rule, a number of my WL:O notes are
obviously irrelevant. However, under this rule the British OB
title for scenario O23 will need to be corrected as it includes
an Oxford comma after the "3".
Ciao,
Rick
#Post#: 3906--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: Vincent Lefavrais Date: November 18, 2019, 8:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Rick McKown link=topic=64.msg3866#msg3866
date=1573860291]
Hi guys,
Not being difficult, just want to make sure I understand this
point since, unfortunately, I missed the earlier discussion
here.
When you say "except where space is at a premium", that could
reasonably be interpreted to mean (1) that the ban on using the
Oxford comma applies only in a situation with a specific ADC
text or OB title where "space" actually is "at a premium" (i.e.,
where the text is so tight that adding a comma would mess up the
text layout). I would say that this is basically the way that
I've approached the Oxford comma issue since, to the best of my
knowledge, space has not been "at a premium" in any of the WL:O
situations I noted.
However, it seems that the intended meaning (which is not quite
what the words say) is (2) that the ban on using the Oxford
comma applies to all ADC texts and all OB titles "by rule", no
matter how much space might actually be available in any
specific situation, presumably because, due to their restricted
layout, it can be expected that space will be "at a premium" for
some portion of the ADC texts and OB titles. Easy enough to
apply the rule.
Assuming that (2) is the rule, a number of my WL:O notes are
obviously irrelevant. However, under this rule the British OB
title for scenario O23 will need to be corrected as it includes
an Oxford comma after the "3".
[/quote]
Rick,
Sorry, I wasn't as precise and thorough as a good proofreader
should be. ;)
By "except where space is at a premium", I should have written
"except where space is potentially at a premium". The (obviously
unwritten) "rule" was that in ADC text and OOB titles, we don't
use Oxford comma at all.
#Post#: 3910--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: Rick McKown Date: November 18, 2019, 10:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi Vincent,
Good to get us all on the same page :-)
Ciao,
Rick
#Post#: 5464--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: pilotofficerprune Date: May 17, 2020, 3:26 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So going through Supremacy's scenarios I was struck by how
Vincent was trying to clear out all uses of the definite article
when it came to unit names. So that "ordering the 16th Aviation
Army" became "ordering 16th Aviation Army". For most of the
suggestions I went along with this. However, when coming to
review the scenario Greycap I found I couldn't do it. In my
mind, named British wings are always prefaced by "the". It's
"the Kenley Wing" not "Kenley Wing", except perhaps in a few
circumstances. I can't explain this. Perhaps there's something
very English about this, but I can't bring myself to drop the
definite article when it comes to these wings.
#Post#: 5480--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: Okmed Date: May 17, 2020, 2:15 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I'd say idiomatic usage within a service should rule instead of
cross-national consistency.
#Post#: 5493--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: Vincent Lefavrais Date: May 18, 2020, 4:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Lee Brimmicombe-Wood link=topic=64.msg5464#msg5464
date=1589704018]
So going through Supremacy's scenarios I was struck by how
Vincent was trying to clear out all uses of the definite article
when it came to unit names. So that "ordering the 16th Aviation
Army" became "ordering 16th Aviation Army". For most of the
suggestions I went along with this. However, when coming to
review the scenario Greycap I found I couldn't do it. In my
mind, named British wings are always prefaced by "the". It's
"the Kenley Wing" not "Kenley Wing", except perhaps in a few
circumstances. I can't explain this. Perhaps there's something
very English about this, but I can't bring myself to drop the
definite article when it comes to these wings.
[/quote]
Lee,
I did it because that's the way I went with Eagles, Victories
2Ed, Origins, and Legends... and you did not object. So I went
for it again, for consistency's sake. I'd say that in my
English-language WW2 collection, more often than not unit names
are given without definite article. ("3rd US Infantry Division
launched its attack" or "Eighth Air Force launched 3rd Bomb Wing
toward Stuttgart") Also, I thought it was a good way to gain
some space where it is at a premium.
Just wanting you to know where I was coming from, mind you.
Heaven forbid that I would try to lecture you on English
writing! [emoji50]
By the way, while you're mentioning Greycap, you don't want the
OOB to read "Canadian" instead of "Allied" (same for "Polish"
instead of "Allied" in Death of JG 1)? I thought this would
bring some variety... I guess you'd rather keep the Polish
nationality for Poland scenarios?
#Post#: 5495--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: pilotofficerprune Date: May 18, 2020, 5:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Re: the definite article. I’m happy to comply up to the point
where it reads weird to me. Perhaps it’s just the British units
where the use of the definite article in colloquial English was
more common.
Re: Poles and Canadians. It’s a sensitive area and I’m sure the
case can be made either way. I realise I am not being completely
consistent on this. For example, the Australians in scenarios
set over Australia are being called ‘Australian’ in Army Day.
However, those were nationally homogenous units fighting over
the home country. Whereas the Canucks in Greycap are Canadian
units with a British commander fighting from the UK. It feels
strange to identify those as Canadian rather than Allied.
I’m happy to listen to arguments on this.
#Post#: 5498--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wing Leader House Style
By: Vincent Lefavrais Date: May 18, 2020, 9:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Lee Brimmicombe-Wood link=topic=64.msg5495#msg5495
date=1589797979]
Re: Poles and Canadians. It’s a sensitive area and I’m sure the
case can be made either way. I realise I am not being completely
consistent on this. For example, the Australians in scenarios
set over Australia are being called ‘Australian’ in Army Day.
However, those were nationally homogenous units fighting over
the home country. Whereas the Canucks in Greycap are Canadian
units with a British commander fighting from the UK. It feels
strange to identify those as Canadian rather than Allied.
I’m happy to listen to arguments on this.
[/quote]
Your argument is spot on with regards to the Polish squadrons in
the RAF... It is also consistent with the way you dealt with the
Flying Tigers, too, for example. I remember these scenarios once
listed the OOB nationality as "Allied" and you ultimately
decided to go with "Chinese" (American pilots, but officially
part of the Chinese Air Force).
But don't you think that still leaves the Canucks of Greycap
Leader out, though? After all, these squadrons were part of the
RCAF, so does listing them as Canadian feel so strange?
Are you REALLY implying that a single Englishman (albeit one of
the finest examples of specimen from the RAF officer corps) is
worth more than a whole Wing of Canadians? :o
(Ducking for cover)
;D
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page