From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/38797 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Backend is not a word Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 17:34:31 -0400 Organization: What did you have in mind? A short, blunt, human pyramid? Message-ID: References: <2n3d5lldop.fsf@piglet.jia.vnet> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035174604 24396 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 04:30:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 04:30:04 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Return-Path: Original-Received: (qmail 20778 invoked from network); 17 Sep 2001 21:34:35 -0000 Original-Received: from multivac.student.cwru.edu (HELO multivac.cwru.edu) (261@129.22.96.25) by gnus.org with SMTP; 17 Sep 2001 21:34:35 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 16227 invoked by uid 500); 17 Sep 2001 21:34:53 -0000 Mail-Followup-To: ding@gnus.org Original-To: ding@gnus.org Mail-Copies-To: never In-Reply-To: <2n3d5lldop.fsf@piglet.jia.vnet> (ShengHuo ZHU's message of "Mon, 17 Sep 2001 17:17:42 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.090004 (Oort Gnus v0.04) Emacs/20.7 Original-Lines: 18 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:38797 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:38797 ShengHuo ZHU wrote: > "Backend" is not a word. It is. When I say "backend", you know what I mean. If it doesn't appear in dictionaries, then that's a deficiency in the dictionaries. > RMS suggests to use "back end", I wonder why; he didn't say. > while "back-end" is found in FOLDOC. What should we write? > Opinions? Any of them would be equally clear, I think. Is "backend" any more awkward than the others? paul