Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2004 10:39:57 -0700 From: "Bruce A. Mah" <bmah@freebsd.org> To: Hiroki Sato <hrs@freebsd.org> Cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/release/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/relnotes/common new.sgml Message-ID: <1094405996.767.22.camel@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20040906.015751.21885686.hrs@eos.ocn.ne.jp> References: <200409050921.i859LW66020701@repoman.freebsd.org> <1094399942.767.7.camel@localhost> <20040906.015751.21885686.hrs@eos.ocn.ne.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Sun, 2004-09-05 at 09:57, Hiroki Sato wrote: > bmah> I like that the markup for library names is now consistent. I'm not > bmah> 100% sure that <application></application> is the best choice; I usually > bmah> used <filename></filename>. But in any case I think this change was an > bmah> improvement. > > Ah, actually I am still floating between the two (<application> and > <filename role="library"> or so) While using <filename> is good > for consistency since it is also used for a package name, I think libfoo > is a component, not just a filename... So <application> is used just > to keep consistency for now. Anyway, let me sleep on it ;) OK, sounds good, thanks. FWIW, it's not real obvious to me what the right choice is, so hopefully this won't keep you from getting a good night's sleep. :-) Bruce. [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBBO09s2MoxcVugUsMRAk2UAKDvdmshsFwWHg/OjrmahkkAS3q7FACdGLA5 TLqunCoSNjsZCowWdMZBvP8= =fiz9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1094405996.767.22.camel>