cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/disks chapter.sgml

[Hiten Pandya]

On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 11:00:18PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> > Actually, and according to my dictionary, irrelevant is more correct
> > here.
> 
> That wasn't my actual question. :) Let me rephrase. "Given that these two
> words basically mean the same thing in context, what was the overwhelming
> necessity of this change?" If the reason was, "To make the meaning
> slightly more accurate," then we can argue the merits based on that... I'm
> just curious.

	Two reasons:

		a) Use simple english which everyone can understand.
		Many people from the far east etc do not understand such
		words, while they can undersand ``useless'' or
		''irrelevant''.  This is also the same reason for my
		"automatic to automagic" change.
		
		b) The 'insignificant' meaning of the word `moot' is
		secondary, while it's primary meaning is the opposite
	
	I have already discussed this change with my mentor, and he
	asked me the same question.

	Hope that helps.
	Cheers.

		-- Hiten (hmp at FreeBSD.ORG)