Re: where are the proofers???

["'A. Joseph Ross'" <lawyer@world.std.com>]

On Sun, 29 Mar 1998, Dan Strassberg wrote:

> Actually, there are exceptions to all of the rules discussed so far in this
> thread. Here's an example: My magazine has a lot of very inflexible rules
> and "no 'apostophe s' in plurals" is one of them. But when we publish lists
> of do's and don'ts, we break the rule--on purpose. Using "dos" as a plural
> of "do" just doesn't cut it. People--particularly our computer-literate
> readers--would be likely to read "dos" incorrectly as "DOS". And even those
> who aren't computer literate (supposedly, none of our readers) would
> probably find "dos" to be a stopper--a word that would interrupt the smooth
> flow of reading and would interfere with comprehension. In 10-1/2 years,
> I've never heard an objection to "do's", even from the nontechnical editors
> who edit my copy. And these are people whose credo seems to be "you must
> follow the rules inflexibly and without thinking."

That is a venerable rule.  It's correct to use an apostrophe in a
non-possessive plural in expressions like 3's or 4's ir A's and B's.  The
flyer to an old record I have refers, correctly, to "Howdy Doody Do's and
Don't's." 

===========================================================================
 A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                                         617.367.0468
 15 Court Square                                      lawyer@world.std.com
 Boston, MA 02108-2503                       http://world.std.com/~lawyer/
===========================================================================

------------------------------