
Lack of Oxford Comma Costs Company Millions - ubasu
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/16/us/oxford-comma-lawsuit.html
======
tmnvix
I've never heard a convincing argument against including the oxford comma. I
always use it as it removes any chance of ambiguity. Even publications that
have a policy of not using the extra comma will sometimes do so for that
reason (e.g. The Associated Press and New York Times according to the
article). Why not simply be consistent and use it always? What is the downside
that I am missing?

~~~
x1798DE
I've seen some examples where _either_ Oxford comma or no Oxford comma
increases ambiguity, based on the sentence. The pro-comma example:

\- He invited the strippers, JFK and Hitler.

\- He invited the strippers, JFK, and Hitler.

(This makes it clear that the strippers are not named JFK and Hitler). The
anti-comma example:

\- He invited the stripper, JFK, and Hitler.

\- He invited the stripper, JFK and Hitler.

With the Oxford comma, it may be that the stripper's name is JFK, whereas
without it's unambiguous that these are three separate people.

~~~
dragonwriter
> With the Oxford comma, it may be that the stripper's name is JFK, whereas
> without it's unambiguous that these are three separate people.

You mean, without it is ambiguous whether they are different than people or a
single stripper with the stage name "JFK and Hitler" (which is probably less
common than, say, "Peaches and cream", but structurally similar.)

~~~
Doxin
It can be parsed as "The stripper named JFK, and hitler."

~~~
dragonwriter
Yes, the form with the Oxford comma has that ambiguity, as stated in the great
grandparent post; the grandparent post was pointing to the ambiguity that
remains without the Oxford comma.

