>>Yes, it is an interesting article. I didn't see any typos though - except for not fully capitalizing the "ARA" acronym. Maybe they cleaned it up?
>
>Not sure. When I read it, I came across one sentence that had "was" instead of "is" and another where a word was omitted.
>
>It seems that I'm alone in this though. I'm surprised that people don't hold an organization like the BBC to a higher standard than that. I know with the onset of blogs and chat, that aspect of language has become lax, but I think that it should be unacceptable with regards in institutions like the BBC, CNN, etc.

Well, of all the "big organizations" who should practice a higher standard, Microsoft is THE ONE that should lead the way. After all it's in their interest to promote the internet to sell their products.

Yet Microsoft web content is riddled with errors. Worse, they think nothing of unilaterally changing a page from one minute to the next, leaving no notation that a change was made. For instance I and a few others, when VFP7 was announced, saw their web page advertise a $100. upgrade discount. They changed it to $40 (or whatever) without any kind of notification that there had been an error ar even that there had been an update.

By the way, I admire your drive towards improved quality and proper integrity.
Here in Canada quality has been on a downward spiral for many years now.
And "integrity" in business has become a MBA program factor where they teach how to exploit - you are free to say one thing (to customers, regulators, etc.) but do another. It only as to SOUND good, and if you get called on it your answer is simply "there's no law against that".

cheers

cheers