[tz] [PROPOSED PATCH 2/2] Use "№" for number sign in commentary

[Paul Eggert]

Ian Abbott wrote:
> the № character does look horribly condensed when rendered in a fixed width font

True.  I mildly prefer "№" but it's not worth the aggravation to others so I 
changed it back to "No." in the experimental version (see attached patch).

This isn't simply an undo: if we combine the last two patches (see the attached 
combined patch) some instances of "Number", "[Number]", "Nº", "no.", etc. have 
been changed to "No.", so the usage is more consistent now.  I was particularly 
bugged by the "Nº", as the masculine ordinal indicator is a solecism here.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0001-Use-No.-for-number-sign-in-commentary.patch
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 27825 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/attachments/20150729/1868d66d/0001-Use-No.-for-number-sign-in-commentary-0001.patch>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: combined.patch
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 12088 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/attachments/20150729/1868d66d/combined-0001.patch>