From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,86616b1931cbdae5 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: je@bton.ac.uk (John English) Subject: Re: Is Ada likely to survive ? Date: 1997/08/19 Message-ID: <5td806$fuj@saturn.brighton.ac.uk>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 265428631 References: <871802047.43snx@jvdsys.nextjk.stuyts.nl> <33F7007A.6E45@flinet.com> Organization: University of Brighton Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-08-19T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: No Spam (Die_Spammer@flinet.com) wrote: : I thought this newsgroup went around the block on this one a while ago. : Seems we had a debate about the capitalization of Fortran, etc. and it : was concluded with some formal reference to some standard somewhere that : yes, indeed, FORTRAN can now legally be spelled Fortran because it had : stopped being an acronym and had become a noun. (Seems like it was : Robert Dewar who came up with the reference too. Maybe he can refresh my : memory...:-) Well, I don't know if Cobol (COBOL?) has met with the same : or similar standards committee, but it would seem that if FORTRAN can : become Fortran because it is now a noun, then COBOL can become Cobol for : similar reasons. In the abscence of a formal committee hearing on the : legality of saying "Cobol" I intend to continue to do so. If the keepers : of gramatical correctness want to prosecute me, so be it. Hey, is this a newsgroup for a case-insensitive language or what? Redirect followups to comp.lang.c/c++/java if not please... :-) --------------------------------------------------------------- John English | mailto:je@brighton.ac.uk Senior Lecturer | http://www.comp.it.bton.ac.uk/je Dept. of Computing | fax: (+44) 1273 642405 University of Brighton | ---------------------------------------------------------------