[CRISP-TEAM] Exposed bottoms.

[Sweeting, John]

I say clean away, it will not change any meanings for sure


On 1/15/15, 12:35 PM, "Bill Woodcock" <woody at pch.net> wrote:

>
>> On Jan 15, 2015, at 9:13 AM, Nurani Nimpuno <nurani at netnod.se> wrote:
>>
>> I agree with Alan and Andrei.
>> I see no reason for this wording to be exactly the same everywhere.
>>(It's not a legal term that needs to be exact.)
>>
>> Simply keep them the way they are.
>
>All of them?  To be clear, I¹m not saying there are six instances, I¹m
>saying there are six competing _variants_, most with multiple instances.
>This is exactly the sort of mess that the editorial process is supposed
>to clean up.  If you all profess not to care about it, why are you all
>sending so many edits to those phrases?
>
>Here¹s a proposal: ³open, transparent, and bottom-up²
>
>That¹s the variant that seems to have been used the most times, whether
>because its advocates have been most vocal, or because it¹s preferred I
>don¹t know, but something is better than nothing.
>
>May I have a sense of consensus that this isn¹t worth continuing to
>bicker over, and that I can just clean them all up to that variant?
>
>                                -Bill
>
>
>
>


This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.