Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 21:45:53 +0200 From: "Simon L. Nielsen" <simon@FreeBSD.org> To: "Bruce A. Mah" <bmah@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/release/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/early-adopter article.sgml src/release/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/errata article.sgml src/release/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/readme article.sgml Message-ID: <20030908194551.GD390@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20030908161913.GA22709@intruder.kitchenlab.org> References: <200309081453.h88Er29F069868@repoman.freebsd.org> <20030908161913.GA22709@intruder.kitchenlab.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--HG+GLK89HZ1zG0kk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2003.09.08 09:19:13 -0700, Bruce A. Mah wrote: > The problem is that "Sparc64(R)" or "Sparc64" is not what we call the > platform, it's "sparc64". (Think of "/usr/src/sys/sparc64".) In my > mind, the use of "sparc64" above is just one step away from a > filename, even though I never marked it up as such. I think there was > a use of "i386" that was similar. It's not clear to me what's the > right thing here. Hmm, I see your point. I think we need some way of differentiating between Sparc64, the hardware architecture (just as an example, same applies to i386/PowerPC/...), and the FreeBSD version running on Sparc64 (sometimes called FreeBSD/sparc64). The most unambiguous way would be to use FreeBSD/(sparc64|i386|powerpc|...) but that might be a bit to "verbose"... How about making entities for the FreeBSD architectures. E.g. &os.sparc64;, &os.i386; and so on. It might be overkill, but it would make it unambiguous what is meant in the DocBook source. Might be overkill though. > A more clear-cut case: What if I have some text that says "look in the > <filename>sparc64</filename> directory". Does this become the > (completely incorrect) "look in the <filename>&sparc64;</filename> > directory"? No, in those cases I have just left the original text with no trademark symbol (in general, not specificly in the release documentation). > No criticism intended, this is good work. I'm just trying to wrap my > mind around it, as well as figure out all the implications of these > changes. Well, there are some cases where it's a bit unclear if the use of a word that is a trademark should be marked up as such, so I would be a bit surprised if there weren't some occurrences where I chose incorrectly. --=20 Simon L. Nielsen FreeBSD Documentation Team --HG+GLK89HZ1zG0kk Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE/XNxvh9pcDSc1mlERAoTaAKCWpj7i99ZhrPrGJ80mo6Y0QyXx8QCdFTBB BKZYn2YXmWsmtY4vgQYq54E= =S+M2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --HG+GLK89HZ1zG0kk--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030908194551.GD390>