Reviewing the use of admonitions

[Paul W. Frields]

On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 18:18 -0400, Eric Christensen wrote:
> I agree with the info and note being close.  I do think that the caution
> and warning could be defined differently.  IF I were defining them I say
> that CAUTION meant that you can do this but shouldn't unless you have
> experience and WARNING means don't do this because you are getting ready
> to fry your system.  I wouldn't want to dilute the WARNING down as I
> want users to really pay attention to what is being said there and not
> just pass it by only to delete everything on their system inadvertently.
> 
> Just my 2 cents worth.

To which I would say, no one is worse off if the CAUTION becomes a
WARNING, as opposed to the opposite.  People should, given your logic --
with which I agree -- then be a little or a lot more careful than
otherwise, making the admonition that much more effective.  I wouldn't
want to dilute the WARNING; given a choice I'd prefer it.

-- 
Paul W. Frields
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://paul.frields.org/   -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
  irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
-------------- 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/20080723/013b38f4/attachment.bin