I disagree with John about the usefulness of your post.
The issue is not single vs double - it is, as John says, the use of marks to indicate that a word or a phrase is being used in a way which is different from its normal usage.
Which can be a valid thing to do, but not around adapter leads, or test leads, or isolated, or informative, or ideal, or speaker (plugs) etc. That debases the English language, and the persistent misuse dilutes the effectiveness of them.
Still - he's not as bad as KenGMac
The issue is not single vs double - it is, as John says, the use of marks to indicate that a word or a phrase is being used in a way which is different from its normal usage.
Which can be a valid thing to do, but not around adapter leads, or test leads, or isolated, or informative, or ideal, or speaker (plugs) etc. That debases the English language, and the persistent misuse dilutes the effectiveness of them.
did he really mean to signal to the reader that Appendix 15 isn't actually informative?We know that ('informative') Appendix 15 of the regs recommends that cooking appliances >2 kW should not be supplied from a ring final circuit.
did he really intend to inform the reader that he wasn't using the word ideal to mean something other than any of its normal meanings?However, accepting that such a practice would certainly not be regarded as 'ideal'..
Still - he's not as bad as KenGMac