Welcome to Codidact Meta!
Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.
Post History
Most English speakers are aware of the difference on the other side of the pond, at least for common terms. As an American, I wouldn't be bothered by a Brit using "lorry" or "colour", although I mi...
Answer
#3: Post edited
by
Olin Lathrop
·
2020-08-11T12:27:31Z (over 3 years ago)
- Most English speakers are aware of the difference on the other side of the pond, at least for common terms.
As an American, I wouldn't be bothered by a Brit using "lorrie" or "colour", although I might misunderstand "minced meat" at first glance. However, it would be very off-putting if I were forced to use the tag "colour" instead of "color".- The solution is to have tag synonyms, although I don't know whether the software supports that. There would be two tags "color" and "colour", for example, but both would point to the same tag definition. That definition can highlight both (or more) tags that it serves. Authors then pick whatever tag they are comfortable with.
- For example the tags "ground beef" and "minced meat" would both point to the same definition:
- <blockquote>
- American: Ground beef<br>
- British: Minced meat<br>
- Extruded ground-up cow. A common ingredient of fast food, and "mystery meat" served in schools.
- </blockquote>
- Most English speakers are aware of the difference on the other side of the pond, at least for common terms.
- As an American, I wouldn't be bothered by a Brit using "lorry" or "colour", although I might misunderstand "minced meat" at first glance. However, it would be very off-putting if I were forced to use the tag "colour" instead of "color".
- The solution is to have tag synonyms, although I don't know whether the software supports that. There would be two tags "color" and "colour", for example, but both would point to the same tag definition. That definition can highlight both (or more) tags that it serves. Authors then pick whatever tag they are comfortable with.
- For example the tags "ground beef" and "minced meat" would both point to the same definition:
- <blockquote>
- American: Ground beef<br>
- British: Minced meat<br>
- Extruded ground-up cow. A common ingredient of fast food, and "mystery meat" served in schools.
- </blockquote>
#2: Post edited
by
Olin Lathrop
·
2020-07-26T13:47:12Z (almost 4 years ago)
- Most English speakers are aware of the difference on the other side of the pond, at least for common terms.
- As an American, I wouldn't be bothered by a Brit using "lorrie" or "colour", although I might misunderstand "minced meat" at first glance. However, it would be very off-putting if I were forced to use the tag "colour" instead of "color".
The solution is to have tag synonyms, although I don't know whether the software supports that. There would be two tags "color" and "colour", for example, but both would point to the same tag definition. That definition can highlight both (or more) tags that it serves. Authors then pick whatever they are comfortable with.- For example the tags "ground beef" and "minced meat" would both point to the same definition:
- <blockquote>
- American: Ground beef<br>
- British: Minced meat<br>
- Extruded ground-up cow. A common ingredient of fast food, and "mystery meat" served in schools.
- </blockquote>
- Most English speakers are aware of the difference on the other side of the pond, at least for common terms.
- As an American, I wouldn't be bothered by a Brit using "lorrie" or "colour", although I might misunderstand "minced meat" at first glance. However, it would be very off-putting if I were forced to use the tag "colour" instead of "color".
- The solution is to have tag synonyms, although I don't know whether the software supports that. There would be two tags "color" and "colour", for example, but both would point to the same tag definition. That definition can highlight both (or more) tags that it serves. Authors then pick whatever tag they are comfortable with.
- For example the tags "ground beef" and "minced meat" would both point to the same definition:
- <blockquote>
- American: Ground beef<br>
- British: Minced meat<br>
- Extruded ground-up cow. A common ingredient of fast food, and "mystery meat" served in schools.
- </blockquote>
#1: Initial revision
by
Olin Lathrop
·
2020-07-26T13:46:07Z (almost 4 years ago)
Most English speakers are aware of the difference on the other side of the pond, at least for common terms. As an American, I wouldn't be bothered by a Brit using "lorrie" or "colour", although I might misunderstand "minced meat" at first glance. However, it would be very off-putting if I were forced to use the tag "colour" instead of "color". The solution is to have tag synonyms, although I don't know whether the software supports that. There would be two tags "color" and "colour", for example, but both would point to the same tag definition. That definition can highlight both (or more) tags that it serves. Authors then pick whatever they are comfortable with. For example the tags "ground beef" and "minced meat" would both point to the same definition: <blockquote> American: Ground beef<br> British: Minced meat<br> Extruded ground-up cow. A common ingredient of fast food, and "mystery meat" served in schools. </blockquote>