http://stackoverflow.com/review/suggested-edits/1910225 Should something like this be approved?
What is meta?
- Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
- The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
- Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates
Yes it should have been approved because the person who originally posted the answer voted to approve the edit, and it's their post so they can edit if they want to (providing they don't vandalize it)
But regardless of if the owner of the post voted or not, I don't see anything wrong with the edit.
The edit may have appeared minor because not many characters were changed, but in my opinion it was a worthwhile edit to make and I would not have considered it "too minor".
The edit corrected the name of the js library in the post title, and it removed some extra markup words from the post's body which improved the readability of the post. The post was less than 30 minutes old, so bumping it isn't that big of a deal.
I might have had some concern about adding bold text where there was none before to a section that doesn't appear to summarize the post, so may have clicked on Improve to remove that, however since the owner of the post approved the edit I am not concerned.
I always approve spelling or unambiguous grammar corrections in titles since they significant impact the presentation of the question, in particular to users coming from a site like Google, but also within SO.
My rule of thumb for grammar/spelling cleanup within a post is I approve if it made it easier to read or faster to process. Improved code formatting usually does. Changing one "recieved" to a "received" and an "i" to an "I" wouldn't.
Any edit which improves the quality of question/answer should be approved. Even if it is minor. Because the purpose of the edit was to improve the quality of asked question.
Also the edit should be meaningful and understandable to other user. Any other non-meaningful edit should be closed.