Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 29 Jul 2002 05:20:20 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Chern Lee <chern@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Ceri Davies <ceri@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Marc Fonvieille <blackend@FreeBSD.org>, Trevor Johnson <trevor@jpj.net>, <freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: docs/38225: change "CDROM" to "CD-ROM"
Message-ID:  <20020729050409.J20453-100000@www.freebsdmall.com>
In-Reply-To: <20020723100035.GA13936@idoru.mine.nu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Might I add, to confirm some of the earlier mention.

Murray and I had decided to standardize on CDROM back in September of 2001
or so.

Reasons being:
1. More occurances of CDROM over CD-ROM
2. History of FreeBSD with Walnut Creek CDROM

All of Walnut Creek's products were CDROMs, and still are CDROMs under
FreeBSD Mall.

I also believe there should be an agreement between the documentation and
the source.

This comes to my attention first:
> dmesg | grep CDROM
acd0: CDROM <CRD-8482B> at ata1-master PIO4

But, digging deeper... CDROM is mentioned more than double the times
CD-ROM in the source.

Unfortunately, CDROM is often used over CD-ROM in function names, macros,
etc.  There were about 170 of these cases.

After removing incidents from src/contrib files and release notes:

CDROM	~185
CD-ROM	~250

CD-ROM is obviously more abundant throughout the source tree -- in
"strings", comments, non-code files, etc.  So, this would be a leading
argument for a change.

More importantly, however, CDROM is the word of choice in Sysinstall and
other more noticable FreeBSD locations.

FreeBSD is marketed on 'CDROM' by most (if not all) of the FreeBSD
vendors, including what is resold in computer superstores such as Fry's
and CompUSA.

IMHO, we should leave it as it is.

Just my 2 cents.

- chern

On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Ceri Davies wrote:

> Nothing in the Documentation Project Primer is set in stone - the note
> mentioning "CDROM" is only there to attempt to maintain consistency so
> far as I can see.
>
> I agree that the change should be made, and I'm prepared to do it once
> I get back online (contrary to appearances, I'm not at the moment).
> This will be in 3 to 4 weeks time by current estimates, so if you'd rather
> not deal with this then please assign the PR to myself.
>
> I certainly don't believe that the PR should be closed, unless wider
> discussion on -doc throws up considerable objection to the change, and
> I can't think of any reason why there would be any (trevor is, after all,
> proposing that we correct an inaccuracy in the project).
>
> > I explained in my previous message (the one where i missed the
> > *re-open*) the reason of the *close*, and it seems your "IMO" is better
> > than my arguments... and according to that message i asked you something,
> > and still nothing in my mailbox...
>
> Please don't upset yourself!
> Trevor's "IMO" is not all the evidence provided - there are documents
> quoted within the PR from companies who own the technology stating that
> the correct acronym is CD-ROM.
>
> Ceri
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
>



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020729050409.J20453-100000>