[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: (Updated) Comments from the current review that we need to discuss
Hi, Frank. Robert and I have an action item from last week to discuss this. I’ll put your e-mail on the agenda at the same time that Robert and I report back about our action item. Best, Kris Kristen James Eberlein Skype: kriseberlein; voice: +1 (919) 622-1501 From: dita@lists.oasis-open.org <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
On Behalf Of Wegmann, Frank I think, the discussion regarding option/paramname was not finished. It might help just once glancing over what has been defined in DocBook, because its roots are in software documentation. For <option>, DocBook states in its
short description: “An option for a software command.” And: “An option idenfities an argument to a software command or instruction. Options may or may not be required.” (https://tdg.docbook.org/tdg/5.1/option.html) That reflects my understanding: Options are always tied to a command, and, curiously enough, may be optional, but could also be mandatory. Parameters are used in a different context: They are variables in the declaration of a function, and I would use <paramname> accordingly. Actual values passed
on to a function are called arguments, but we don’t have that. You don’t define options in a function, you don’t pass options around. Of course, “parameter’ also has another, much broader, general meaning, but not if we’re talking software. Now, whatever people use, is of course their decision. But in the spec we should stick to what people familiar with a computer science/programming background
would expect here. Admittedly, I wasn’t aware of <option> either, but I haven’t done so much software documentation in DITA… f. From: dita@lists.oasis-open.org <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
On Behalf Of Kristen James Eberlein Hi, folks. There are several comments from the current review that we need to discuss. The links below go to the topic in the Content Fusion review, so if you have not yet used Content Fusion, you’ll need to decide on how you want to log in. You can
log in using your GitHub or Google credentials, or you can set up a Content Fusion user ID and password.
A PDF of the Content Fusion review is attached. Best, Kris Kristen James Eberlein Skype: kriseberlein; voice: +1 (919) 622-1501
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]