Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 21:28:58 +0100 From: "Simon L. Nielsen" <simon@FreeBSD.org> To: Marc Fonvieille <blackend@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/security chapter.sgml Message-ID: <20031230202857.GA671@arthur.nitro.dk> In-Reply-To: <20031230193540.F90071@abigail.blackend.org> References: <200312301749.hBUHnJjx004040@repoman.freebsd.org> <20031230132034.36281ba6.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> <20031230193540.F90071@abigail.blackend.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--9jxsPFA5p3P2qPhR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2003.12.30 19:35:40 +0100, Marc Fonvieille wrote: > I see your point. Most of time I use literal tags but according to the > FDP: >=20 > "Use <option> to mark up a command's options." >=20 > and the TDG tells us: >=20 > "option identifies an optional argument to a software command." >=20 > but I think our stylesheet renders option and literal in the same way. >=20 > I'd use literal when I don't find a specific tag. I also understand <literal> as a kind of fall-back if there isn't a more specific tag, so I think <option> should be used when it's there (and the FDP even recomends it). The same way that one could mark-up a filename in <literal> tags if there was no <filename> tag. With regards to flags tag, I rememeber seeing some other tag that could also be used for command line arguments, but I can't remember what one it was right now. --=20 Simon L. Nielsen FreeBSD Documentation Team --9jxsPFA5p3P2qPhR Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE/8eAJh9pcDSc1mlERAsxHAJ9zIleBRZGFrC8MUn4zGf1lh5oa+gCfZRpf n1vVx3ZJz2LpbmDS+4Vh/rc= =msiD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --9jxsPFA5p3P2qPhR--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031230202857.GA671>