From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 19 13:09:09 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BEEE37B401; Mon, 19 May 2003 13:09:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from arthur.nitro.dk (port324.ds1-khk.adsl.cybercity.dk [212.242.113.79]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 795DC43FBF; Mon, 19 May 2003 13:09:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from simon@arthur.nitro.dk) Received: by arthur.nitro.dk (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C86EE10BF81; Mon, 19 May 2003 22:09:06 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 22:09:06 +0200 From: "Simon L. Nielsen" To: Tom Rhodes Message-ID: <20030519200900.GA1120@nitro.dk> References: <20030519192255.GB74434@submonkey.net> <20030519153048.51f20a06.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="BXVAT5kNtrzKuDFl" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030519153048.51f20a06.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i cc: Ceri Davies cc: doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Application and command names in elements X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Documentation project <freebsd-doc.freebsd.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-doc>, <mailto:freebsd-doc-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc> List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-doc@freebsd.org> List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-doc-request@freebsd.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-doc>, <mailto:freebsd-doc-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 20:09:09 -0000 --BXVAT5kNtrzKuDFl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2003.05.19 15:30:48 -0400, Tom Rhodes wrote: > I'd like to chime in here if you do not mind. While I was thinking > about this just last night, a question arose as to which is more appropri= ate: > <command> or manual page entities. In a patch I used man entities multiple times shortly after each other and Murrays changed it in the committed version to only use it the first time and use <command> for the other cases. <comment by Murray from docs/50790 audit trail> One thing to note is that it doesn't look good to use the man page entities twice in close=20 proximity. So I used &man.dumpon.8; the first time, then just used=20 <command>dumpon</command> elsewhere in the paragraph.=20 </comment> I think this is seems like a good way since the man reference is still nice to have. > Perhaps we should standardize this some way. We have the screen for exam= ples. > Perhaps for commands where we do not need the screen tag, we can use the > markup: >=20 > Use <command>cvsup -g -L 2 src</command> to remove the graphic dependency= on > X11. >=20 > Then we can use screen for, say, a series of commands which generate outp= ut. I think screen is mainly uses this way at the moment? It seems <screen> is used when there is output or if it is a command the user should run which is then preceded by a prompt char. This is at least the impression I get from a grep trough the handbook. --=20 Simon L. Nielsen --BXVAT5kNtrzKuDFl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD4DBQE+yTnc8kocFXgPTRwRAkM4AJjJuljqQHclSq0WXhEsdG/179A3AKCgm1G3 Sfqev72FoEt/qqMtaTy/dw== =8nCE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --BXVAT5kNtrzKuDFl--