Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vale.sh – A Linter for Prose

vale.sh

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 89 posts

Re: Vale.sh – A Linter for Prose

#41

Post by bayindirh »

jrm4 wrote: post #39

I'm trying to figure out why I instinctively hate this. I think it's probably because the purpose of computer languages is different from human language. It's certainly valuable to have a linter to make sure the code works, and there's probably value in "style" as well for readability. But when you get to human language, I don't know, feels like you have the potential to suck out soul/creativity etc. As in, I imagine…

I think iA Writer does this well. It has a "mark fillers" setting which crosses out cliches, fillers and other things which dilute the sentences. It's just a finger pointing at "you might want to reconsider this", and if it's indeed something I don't want there, I take it out, otherwise leave it in.

I strive to write with a very neutral tone, and without any strong words, so it really helps me.

You can see the results of that process at https://blog.bayindirh.io

Re: Vale.sh – A Linter for Prose

#43

Post by jhbadger »

jrm4 wrote: post #39

I'm trying to figure out why I instinctively hate this. I think it's probably because the purpose of computer languages is different from human language. It's certainly valuable to have a linter to make sure the code works, and there's probably value in "style" as well for readability. But when you get to human language, I don't know, feels like you have the potential to suck out soul/creativity etc. As in, I imagine…

(human) Copy editors have long been part of the professional writing field, though. It's not like applying rules to writing is something new. Yes, "genius" writers can and do break the rules, but 99% of writers aren't them.

Re: Vale.sh – A Linter for Prose

#46

Post by tommica »

xwowsersx wrote: post #23

This looks great! By the way, I can't be the only one using ChatGPT to rewrite docs and messages, right? I regularly tell ChatGPT: "Rewrite the following, don't make it too formal:.." or "rewrite the following optimizing for brevity:..." and it usually spits something out much clearer than my first revision. Sometimes there's just one sentence I was struggling to write clearly and this helps a ton. Really valuable in…

Yeah, it's a good use case for it. I also use it to translate messages for me in languages that I am weak in, and I really like it's ability to summarize things.

Re: Vale.sh – A Linter for Prose

#47

Post by mgaunard »

block_dagger wrote: post #38
mooreds wrote: post #30

Have tried to use this a few times but it's a big lift. Like adding unit tests to an existing application, it's a good idea to start small. And vale doesn't make this super easy (at least I couldn't figure out an easy way to do this). If I could wave my wand, I'd want a way to: * apply vale to just the doc I was working on * have a minimal set of rules * add to them over time At $curjob, we have a detailed public lis…

In the first bullet point of the linked document, there is an inconsistency in the very style it’s trying to enforce, namely capitalization. UUID vs Id. Consistency is hard!

Acronyms and abbreviations are different things though.

Re: Vale.sh – A Linter for Prose

#48

Post by kstrauser »

jrm4 wrote: post #39

I'm trying to figure out why I instinctively hate this. I think it's probably because the purpose of computer languages is different from human language. It's certainly valuable to have a linter to make sure the code works, and there's probably value in "style" as well for readability. But when you get to human language, I don't know, feels like you have the potential to suck out soul/creativity etc. As in, I imagine…

I use(d) Grammarly to double-check my personal blog posts. A lot of its purely technical catches, like duplicating words, mismatching tenses, mismatching plurals, etc. are great. I usually ignore its style suggestions altogether, especially when I'm deliberately breaking a rule because the "wrong" text reads better.

Re: Vale.sh – A Linter for Prose

#49

Post by tomjakubowski »

mgaunard wrote: post #47
block_dagger wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the first bullet point of the linked document, there is an inconsistency in the very style it’s trying to enforce, namely capitalization. UUID vs Id. Consistency is hard!

Acronyms and abbreviations are different things though.

A not-untypical style (as used by the BBC) is to write initialisms like UUID in all caps, and acronyms like Nasa in title case.

Initialisms are pronounced by saying each letter in order. Acronyms are pronounced as if they were words.

"ID" is a funny case because it's an ordinary abbreviation, and not really an initialism* or acronym, but it's pronounced just like an initialism. I think I'd prefer it "ID".

I would definitely avoid writing it "Id", lest it be confused with Freud's concept.

* unless as Norm Macdonald joked, the "D" is short for "dentification"

Re: Vale.sh – A Linter for Prose

#50

Post by jamilton »

kstrauser wrote: post #3

But what is it? Is this like Grammarly? Maybe LanguageTool? I paged through most of the docs and I’m still not entirely sure what this does or why I might want to use it.

What's unclear about it? My impression from the window screenshot alone is you choose rule docs and a text doc, and it tells you what parts of the text doc violate parts of the rule docs . It could be used to help make sure writing (likely for some corporate or technical purpose) follows a set style guide. Organizations already often follow formal style guides in their writing, I don't know if they have their own similar tools to automatically check if their style is being adhered to.

So like Grammarly, but you bring your own rules.

Post reply on HN