Grammar Question: Better choice in the following sentence (see details): "that" or "which" ?

To quote from Schmoo, from http://www.fluther.com/ld/393/ - According to _Woe is I_ (an awesome grammar book!), the difference is this: If you can drop the clause that "that" or "which" begins with and the sentence still makes sense, use "which." If you need the clause to have the whole sentence make sense, use "that." For example, "Nobody likes a dog that bites." 'That' is correct here; without its clause, the sentence would simply say, "Nobody likes a dog," and the sentence loses its meaning. However, in the sentence "Buster's bulldog, which had one white ear, won best in show," you can drop the "which" clause and still get the main gist of the sentence: "Buster's bulldog won best in show." Also, commas precede a which, but not a that."

Wow... I like The Elements of Style for tips.

Sorry, wasn't ready to send that off.

"That" is the better choice here. Ben has a good explanation.

You could also just write "Dr. _____ also successfully completed a publication containing a full-color catalog..." and that might be preferable.

Wearing my longtime editor's hat, which still fits,I would reflexively change Bob's quote to read: "Dr. -------also successfully completed a publication that contained a full-color catalog." "That" is restrictive. i.e. essential and does not follow a comma, which makes sense. "Which" is non- restrictive, i.e. non-essential and that always needs a preceding comma. This is now considered pedantic by most writers, but it is fun to know the differences. Very few subjects fill me with awe, so I use "awesome" selectively, speaking of being pedantic.The recent total lunar eclipse was, I thought, awesome..

Woe is I is a great, user-friendly, grammar book.

I had asked the exact same question a few months ago--search it! There were some great, very clear responses.

"Pedantic" is itself a fun word, because its use is itself, largely pedantic today. I like "

I find "pedantic" a useful word, however, to have on tap. And there are still the old fuddy-duddies (such as moi) who object to "fun" being used as an adjective. And repeating myself from the earlier question, check out THE CHICAGO MANUAL OF STYLE, if you are submitting mss to THE NY REVIEW OF BOOKS or THE ATLANTIC.

Oh my. All these answers and no real answers.

There is no choice. The correct word is "that".

You will find this out if you frequently use a grammar checker. It will also train you.

Using the word "which" generally implies that the phrase is a non-essential description of the noun. It seems from the sense implied in the sentence that BrainFreeze used that "that" would be the better choice.

The point of the sentence seems to be that Dr.---'s publication contained a full color catalog, not that the publication had a number of features, and that the full color catalog was just one of them, or that there was some other point to describing the publication. Finally, "that" just sounds better!

Ben and Woe is I are wrong. It is not “which” that marks the nonrestrictive clause, it’s the comma. “that” is used with restrictive clauses, and “which” is used with both restrictive and nonrestrictive clauses.

Look in any novel and you’re sure to find examples of “which” heading nonrestrictive clauses.

For example
It was a concern which brought just employment enough. (Jane Austen, Emma, chapter 2)