deprecated subtag 'bjq' and others

[Philip Newton]

On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 19:45, Doug Ewell <doug at ewellic.org> wrote:
> I guess you meant "comma."  Although I'm personally a fan of the serial
> comma, and although Section 3.1.5 allows descriptions from core
> standards to be edited "to correct irregularities in formatting (such as
> misspellings, inappropriate apostrophes or other punctuation, or
> excessive or missing spaces)," I don't think this particular case is
> egregious enough to warrant such editing.  Others are welcome to opine
> here.

I agree with you on both points (preferring the serial comma, but that
I wouldn't make the change if the source did not use it).

Cheers,
Philip
-- 
Philip Newton <philip.newton at gmail.com>