[mb-style] [Clean up CSG] Correct punctuation (was: Typography)

[Brian Schweitzer]

>> * Alex and Lauri seem to argue that the "correct" (they don't seem to
>> disagree on that) punctuation marks are hard-to-impossible to use, and
>> are against requiring them. (It's not clear to me if they at least agree
>> to "allow" or "encourage" their use.)
>
>This is actually closer to how I feel on the issue.  I don't want to
>construct unnecessary barriers for editors or users.  I would prefer
>to, as Jeff so succinctly put it, "err on the side of inclusion".

I quite agree.  I think it all boils down to one question:

So long as we allow standard punctuation to be used as 100% ok, when
we're not yet ready to present a copy/paste alternative (via master
lists or an eventual generic works structure), can we then at least
permit the use of dashes, en-dashes, em-dashes, and language-correct
(for the CSG language style being used) quotation marks as also ok,
and mark such "better" punctuation as the encouraged preference of the
two for which is used within a finalized master works list?

That's really what I was trying to get at in the 1-2-3 structure I
suggested in http://www.nabble.com/-Clean-up-CSG--Typography-%28was%3A-Capitalization-%28and-placement%29%29-to15175325s2885.html

Brian