Inado-san makes a very good point.

The (English) language used in technical documents is not AAVE. It's not Scotts-English. It's not Jamaican vernacular. It's not Indian English. But it is ALSO not American upper-middle class, white ivy-league English.

Technical documentation is a kind of DSL within the world of English dialects. There is a greatly restricted vocabulary and grammar used for this purpose, and no native speaker or writer doing "ordinary" communication would use this DSL.

On Thu, Jul 2, 2020, 10:35 AM Inada Naoki <> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 6:40 PM Chris Angelico <> wrote:
> True, but "inclusive" isn't just about the people *writing*. If you
> write your comments in French, and someone else uses Turkish, another
> uses Japanese, and still another opts for Hebrew, it becomes nearly
> impossible for anyone to *read* those comments. Standardizing on a
> single language ensures that everyone can read the comments in a
> single, consistent language.

Thank you for mentioning Japanese.
I totally agree with you. Readability counts, not writability.

I am not good at English. I can not live in English world. I don't
understand many proverbs
and idioms. I may not be able to buy even food!

But I can read technical documents like RFC. English used in RFC is
very clear to me.
I don't know English in RFC is S&W English or not. But I believe
English used in RFC is
very inclusive for the engineers in the world.

I don't think I can write such clear English without help. But having
such a goal is inclusive
for non native English readers.

Inada Naoki  <>
Python-Dev mailing list --
To unsubscribe send an email to
Message archived at
Code of Conduct: