This headline in today's NYTimes intrigues me: Wide Flaws Found in Boston Tunnel After Death
How can a flaw be "wide"? Now, if they had found wide claws -as if from some kind of tunnel beastie- that I could believe.
Obviously it is horrible that a woman died because of these flaws. Even so, I would expect editors at the esteemed daily would have a better command of language. Since a flaw is a diagnostic term, how can it have physical properties? Can a flaw be "immense" or "tousled"?
I would have gone a different way, describing the flaws as "endemic", "perilous", or "extensive".