<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Martin Landa escribió:
<blockquote
cite="midf8fe65c40707060434n523ca9a7q27281c139e3ec9b9@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">Hi, <br>
<br>
just a stupid note <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">- G_fatal_error(_("Unable to
open raster map [%s]"), name_h); <br>
+ G_fatal_error(_("Unable to open raster map
<%s>"), name_h); <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
wouldn't be better to use "Cannot open raster map <%s>"?, see
wiki and <br>
discussion in grass-dev mailing list... <br>
</blockquote>
For sure I may be wrong, but I've been revising wiki and lists (dev and
translations) and I can't see where it is suggested to use cannot
instead of unable to.<br>
What I found is:<br>
>From wiki<br>
<h3> Standard messages sandbox </h3>
<ul>
<li> First letter should be capitalized </li>
<li> Use the present tense (cannot instead of could not; <b>better:
unable to</b>)</li>
</ul>
...<br>
<ul>
<li> G_open_cell_old </li>
</ul>
<dl>
<dd> "<b>Unable to open raster map <%s></b>"</dd>
</dl>
>From translation list:<br>
<pre wrap="">> > > I would prefer not using "Cannot...". It's bad grammar. I would much
> <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> > </span>prefer "Unable to..." or something to that effect.
</pre>
<pre wrap="">> <span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span><span
class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>While I can see your point, that construction is quite common in error
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span><span
class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>messages, e.g.:
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> > </span>
<span class="moz-txt-citetags"></span><span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span><span
class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span> $ ls -l foo
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>> ls: cannot access foo: No such file or directory
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> > </span>
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>> Neither "cannot ..." nor "unable to ..." form complete sentences.
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> ></span>
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>> If you're concerned about grammar, you can provide an explicit subject
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>> ("The program cannot ..."), or use the third person (e.g. "The file
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>> cannot be found").
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> > </span>
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>> Personally, I don't have a problem with just omitting the subject.
</pre>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
> Point taken. I was really referring to the usage of "Cannot". Some
> dictionaries do not recognize it as 'real word', yet others (that are
> generally more progressive with slang and contractions) say that it
> should replace "can not" in modern English.
>
> It's a non-problem. In modules I've [re]written, I've used "Unable to",
> but I can go back and change them for consistency.
</pre>
It seems to me that "Unable to" is the most impartial form.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="midf8fe65c40707060434n523ca9a7q27281c139e3ec9b9@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite"><br>
Martin <br>
<br>
PS: Thanks to Carlos for this hard job! <br>
</blockquote>
Thanks to all of you for the support.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>