Typo

[DarkGravity]

In the part called MK2 Rocket Fuel Fuselage (not to be confused with the MK2 Liquid Fuel Fuselage), there is a typo.

In the last sentence of the bottom manufacturer section, the description reads "Now comes with at least 100% more Oxidiser." In the top specifications portion (and in many other places through out the game), the word is correctly spelled "Oxidizer." I suggest you change "Oxidiser" to "Oxidizer."

Rust never sleeps.

[Bill Phil]

Either way is accepted, and it depends on where you come from. Since Squad members aren't all the same nationality, nor are their modder partners, it is to be expected.

It's not a typo.

[amorymeltzer]

Either way is accepted, and it depends on where you come from. Since Squad members aren't all the same nationality, nor are their modder partners, it is to be expected.

It's not a typo.

It may not by itself be a typo, but surely if the style is to use oxidizer than oxidiser is indeed a typo, just as spelling it aluminium would be if the game-wide style was to spell it aluminum.

And, FWIW, the typo exists in both the regular and short MK2 rocket fuel fuselages.

[Bill Phil]

It may not by itself be a typo, but surely if the style is to use oxidizer than oxidiser is indeed a typo, just as spelling it aluminium would be if the game-wide style was to spell it aluminum.

And, FWIW, the typo exists in both the regular and short MK2 rocket fuel fuselages.

It's not a typo when both are accepted spellings.

It may not be very appealing to have an inconsistency such as this, but it is not a typo. This is called an inconsistency. It is not a mistake in spelling.

[DarkGravity]

It is accepted among writers as something to be corrected unless you are specifically trying to demonstrate the patchwork contributions of writers from different cultures, which this game isn't trying to do. Virtually everywhere else in KSP "oxidizer" is used. The very few instances of "oxidiser" should be changed, especially when it is spelled two different ways in the very same item description. Whether this amounts to a "typo" or merely bad writing style is a distinction without a difference. It should be changed.

Edited May 18, 2015 by DarkGravity

[cicatrix]

As long as SQUAD all agrees to use the same units of measurement everywhere they can use both oxidizer and oxidiser, and of any color of colour they want.

[RogueMason]

Why don't we change all of the instances of 'oxidizer' to 'oxidiser', instead? American 'English' seriously bothers me.

(Note that, as a Brit, I do find Americanisms annoying, but I'm willing to put up with them for the game. I'm more concerned that the temperatures in the game are in Fahrenheit rather than Kelvin or Celsius )

[Vectura]

Whether this amounts to a "typo" or merely bad writing style

It is neither a typo (unintentional error) nor bad writing style (american english is not the only way of writing things!)

[stibbons]

As an aside, before things get really nerdy, this could all be done away with if we just used "oxidator".

I got curious, and did some quick checking in my unmodded 1.0.2 install:

% grep -iro oxidiser GameData/Squad | wc -l

2

% grep -iro oxidizer GameData/Squad | wc -l

56

% grep -iro colour GameData/Squad | wc -l

1

% grep -iro color GameData/Squad | wc -l

89

% grep -iro aluminium GameData/Squad | wc -l

0

% grep -iro aluminum GameData/Squad | wc -l

2

I'm tempted to fire up aspell and see what it makes of the stock .cfg files (I've already got a custom word file that mostly works with KSPisms, thanks to spell checking Crowd Sourced Science a few times) but I think that's illustrative enough.

Both instances of "oxidiser" are in Porkjet's parts, which in real life probably just means Porkjet isn't US-born. If you need some headcanon for how it could happen, then writing it up to "C7 Aerospace are from a part of Kerbin superior at the remarkably English-like language Kerbals speak" seems to explain things well enough.

The lone instance of "colour" seems to be in a sentence describing Minmus in the contract generator (GameData/Squad/Resources/StoryDefs.cfg), whereas all of "color" are in part files.

If they all have to be uniform game-wide, then I'd second the vote for normal spelling over US English. Because, well, it's normal. But I kind of defer to Wikipedia's rules - either/or as long as it's consistent in the given scope. When I was applying that rule to Crowd Sourced Science, the scope was an individual science report. In this context, the scope would be an individual [part description | contract | science report | etc]. Basically, no, there is no misspelling here.

Edited May 18, 2015 by stibbons

[DarkGravity]

A "typo" can refer to more than just a spelling error caused by striking the wrong key on a keyboard. It is a word whose meaning is currently in flux, just like the word "data," which used to mean the plural of datum exclusively. Nowadays it frequently is used as singular or plural. Likewise "typo" can refer to any misspelled word.

As for bad writing style, no one ever said that things not written in American English represent bad writing style. The thing that makes it bad writing style is the mixing of two different spelling conventions for no specific reason. It would be fine writing style to use "oxidiser" in every instance, as long as all the rest of the writing in the game used the spelling conventions that go along with it, such as "aluminium" and "colour." But elsewhere, KSP consistently uses American English, so it most definitely is bad writing style to suddenly out of nowhere throw in another spelling convention. The only exception would be if the other spelling convention were being used for a specific purpose, like if the part were manufactured by The James Bond Aerospace Company, and the author wanted to play up the Britishness of this particular part.

Edited May 18, 2015 by DarkGravity