"Typ" seems to be more of an engineer's thing than actual English.
Regarding commas, as a few have pointed out, this is funny because a while
ago we had a knock-down drag-out brawl over this very subject while
preparing our 7"-thick Y2K Manual. We had executives arguing with us and
each other over petty wording and everyone could produce a book showing that
they were correct!!
The bottom line is that when grouping things, as:
"...one, two, or three..."
You ∗are∗ supposed to have a comma in front of the "or" or "and" as the case
may be. However, older style guides may not show it, or indicate that it is
optional. Modern usage demands it. We found that people over 45 here
generally insisted that there was no comma and under that insisted that
there _should_ be one. We finally contacted the Queen of England or
something and supposedly got the definitive answer on the subject.
By the way, we were told that with bullet points, a similar usage is
required:
∗ One;
∗ Two; and,
∗ Three.
When done in formal style.
-----Original Message-----
From: Brousseau, Paul E (Paul) [mailto:
noise@...]
Sent:Monday, 08 January, 2001 11:03 AM
To:'
motm@egroups.com'
Subject:RE: [motm] Proofing Part #2
In the 420, first bullet, I think you need another comma after the "and":
"LP, HP, and Notch responces".
In the 900 section, first bullet, what is "(typ)"? Do you mean "typical"?
If so, spell it out! At first, I thought you might have meant "type".
Again, I was not an english major!