Sigh, how natural it is to say "This package ...", but you probably don't know a package can be easily rejected by CRAN simply because of this phrase "This package" (it has been clearly stated in the R-exts manual). I don't think the grammar is the problem here. When in doubt, I always check what MASS does: http://cran.rstudio.com/web/packages/MASS/index.html Turns out its description is not a complete sentence, either. Sounds like R has become a language for statistical computing and graphics, plus English grammar since 3.0.x. Regards, Yihui -- Yihui Xie <xieyihui at gmail.com> Web: http://yihui.name On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Rolf Turner <r.turner at auckland.ac.nz> wrote:> On 03/07/15 20:09, Federico Calboli wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> I am upgrading a package for CRAN, and I get this note: >> >> checking DESCRIPTION meta-information ... NOTE Malformed Description >> field: should contain one or more complete sentences. >> >> This is puzzling because: >> >> cat DESCRIPTION >> >> ... Description: Functions designed to test for single gene/phenotype >> association and for pleiotropy on genetic and genomic data. ... >> >> In my understanding "Functions designed to test for single >> gene/phenotype association and for pleiotropy on genetic and genomic >> data.? *is* a complete sentence. So, what is complete sentence in >> the opinion of whomever coded that check? > > > > If that is your understanding you need to go back to school and learn some > grammar. What you have is a noun ("Functions") modified by an adjectival > clause. No verb in sight. Ergo *not* a complete sentence. > > OTOH you are probably in good company in not knowing your grammar. The CRAN > folks most likely don't know grammar either. I suspect that they *don't* > actually demand a complete sentence. Such a demand would in fact be rather > pedantic. Moreover I really can't see how the package checker could > possibly check for complete sentences. This would require some very > sophisticated programming, it seems to me. > > If it turns out that you *really* need a complete sentence, you could say > (for instance): > > This package consists of functions designed to test for single > gene/phenotype association and for pleiotropy on genetic and genomic data. > > The foregoing *is* a complete sentence. > > cheers, > > Rolf Turner > > -- > Technical Editor ANZJS > Department of Statistics > University of Auckland > Phone: +64-9-373-7599 ext. 88276
On 04/07/15 06:27, Yihui Xie wrote:> Sigh, how natural it is to say "This package ...", but you probably > don't know a package can be easily rejected by CRAN simply because of > this phrase "This package" (it has been clearly stated in the R-exts > manual).Urrrkkkk! I *did* "know" that, but had forgotten. Apologies for my wrong-headed suggestion. Thanks for pointing out my error.> I don't think the grammar is the problem here. When in doubt, I always > check what MASS does: > http://cran.rstudio.com/web/packages/MASS/index.html Turns out its > description is not a complete sentence, either. > > Sounds like R has become a language for statistical computing and > graphics, plus English grammar since 3.0.x.The CRAN guidelines should be rewritten so that they say what they *mean*. If a complete sentence is not actually required --- and it seems abundantly clear that it is not --- then guidelines should not say so. Rather they should say, clearly and comprehensibly, what actually *is* required. cheers, Rolf Turner -- Technical Editor ANZJS Department of Statistics University of Auckland Phone: +64-9-373-7599 ext. 88276
On 04/07/2015 12:26 AM, Rolf Turner wrote:> On 04/07/15 06:27, Yihui Xie wrote: >> Sigh, how natural it is to say "This package ...", but you probably >> don't know a package can be easily rejected by CRAN simply because of >> this phrase "This package" (it has been clearly stated in the R-exts >> manual). > > Urrrkkkk! I *did* "know" that, but had forgotten. Apologies for my > wrong-headed suggestion. Thanks for pointing out my error. > >> I don't think the grammar is the problem here. When in doubt, I always >> check what MASS does: >> http://cran.rstudio.com/web/packages/MASS/index.html Turns out its >> description is not a complete sentence, either. >> >> Sounds like R has become a language for statistical computing and >> graphics, plus English grammar since 3.0.x. > > The CRAN guidelines should be rewritten so that they say what they > *mean*. If a complete sentence is not actually required --- and it > seems abundantly clear that it is not --- then guidelines should not say > so. Rather they should say, clearly and comprehensibly, what actually > *is* required.There's often a difference between a requirement and the test for it. If you meet the requirement, you should pass the test, but you can often pass the test without meeting the requirement, and then you may find that the test is improved in a later version. (Requirements may also be changed, of course.) Duncan Murdoch
> The CRAN guidelines should be rewritten so that they say what they *mean*. > If a complete sentence is not actually required --- and it seemsabundantly clear> that it is not --- then guidelines should not say so. Rather they shouldsay,> clearly and comprehensibly, what actually *is* required.This may be true, but also think of the user when you write the description. If you are scanning a long list of descriptions looking for a package to use, seeing a description that starts with 'A package for' just slows you down. Seeing a description that includes 'designed to' leaves you wondering if the implementation is woefully incomplete. You want to go beyond what CRAN can test for. Bill Dunlap TIBCO Software wdunlap tibco.com On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 3:26 PM, Rolf Turner <r.turner at auckland.ac.nz> wrote:> On 04/07/15 06:27, Yihui Xie wrote: > >> Sigh, how natural it is to say "This package ...", but you probably >> don't know a package can be easily rejected by CRAN simply because of >> this phrase "This package" (it has been clearly stated in the R-exts >> manual). >> > > Urrrkkkk! I *did* "know" that, but had forgotten. Apologies for my > wrong-headed suggestion. Thanks for pointing out my error. > > I don't think the grammar is the problem here. When in doubt, I always >> check what MASS does: >> http://cran.rstudio.com/web/packages/MASS/index.html Turns out its >> description is not a complete sentence, either. >> >> Sounds like R has become a language for statistical computing and >> graphics, plus English grammar since 3.0.x. >> > > The CRAN guidelines should be rewritten so that they say what they > *mean*. If a complete sentence is not actually required --- and it seems > abundantly clear that it is not --- then guidelines should not say so. > Rather they should say, clearly and comprehensibly, what actually *is* > required. > > > cheers, > > Rolf Turner > > -- > Technical Editor ANZJS > Department of Statistics > University of Auckland > Phone: +64-9-373-7599 ext. 88276 > > ______________________________________________ > R-help at r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help > PLEASE do read the posting guide > http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. >[[alternative HTML version deleted]]