Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 23:04:23 -0700 From: Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> To: Murray Stokely <murray.stokely@windriver.com> Cc: doc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Markup for ports Message-ID: <20010720060423.DA9673E2F@bazooka.unixfreak.org> In-Reply-To: <20010719120925.G27537@meow.osd.bsdi.com>; from murray.stokely@windriver.com on "Thu, 19 Jul 2001 12:09:25 -0700"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Murray Stokely <murray.stokely@windriver.com> writes: > I support this in general, but more thought needs to be placed on > how this will look without the benefit of a hyperlink. Another > example of dependence on hyperlinks is the use of <xrefs> being > printed out as file:/// in the printed version of the Handbook which > doesn't look very good. It seems that many sentences are constructed > in the handbook such that they depend on the hyperlink for proper > context. I don't want anything to encourage that practice. > > "Other interfaces, like databases/tkgnats should also work nicely." > > This is pretty informal. Will the markup given to your new <port> > tag be sufficient to clue in new users that we are talking about a > FreeBSD port? Or is more verbiage necessary, such as : > > "Other interfaces, like the port databases/tkgnats should also work > nicely." Okay, but this is up to the author of that sentence. <port> is akin to <filename>; just like the latter can be abused, so can the former. The hyperlink is just an extra bonus; the real point is to have more precise markup. If you think the hyperlink will encourage dependence on it, I'm fine with <port> being another name for <filename>. 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?20010720060423.DA9673E2F>