<command> vs <application>

[Stuart Ellis]

On Thu, 2005-09-08 at 12:45 -0700, Karsten Wade wrote

> For this reason, we may have mandatory and recommended usages.  I don't
> know if this is the best thing, however.
> 
> For example, we may say this style is mandatory:
> 
> <screen>
> cd foo
> ./bar -o baaz
> cat baaz > quux
> </screen>
> 
> and this is recommended or preferred:
> 
> <screen>
> <userinput><command>cd</command> <filename>foo</filename>
> <command>./bar</command> <option>-o baaz</option> 
> <command>cat</command> <filename>baaz</filename></userinput>
> <computeroutput>[contents of baaz]</computeroutput>
> </screen>
> 
> Crazy, eh?  But sure helpful when you need to parse that content into a
> Braille reader, keyboard, and low-vision console.
> 
> I think we need to decide for these cases i) what is mandatory, and ii)
> what is recommended.

I think it does have to be driven by the requirements of the targets.
Piling on tags makes it harder to edit and review documents, and it's
easier to mandate more complex requirements if there is a reason. "This
ensures that braille readers can handle your documentation" is a good
positive incentive.

-- 

Stuart Ellis

stuart at elsn.org

Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/

GPG key ID: 7098ABEA
GPG key fingerprint: 68B0 E291 FB19 C845 E60E  9569 292E E365 7098 ABEA 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/docs/attachments/20050908/aa49d24a/attachment.bin