Re: [PGdocs] fix description for handling pf non-ASCII characters

On Thu, 28 Sep 2023 09:49:03 +1000
Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 11:59 PM Karl O. Pinc <kop@karlpinc.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 27 Sep 2023 12:58:54 +0000
> > "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > Should the committer be interested, your patch applies cleanly
> > > > and the docs build as expected.
> > >
> > > Yeah, but cfbot accepted previous version. Did you have anything
> > > in your mind?
> >
> > No.  I'm letting the committer know everything I've checked
> > so that they can decide what they want to check.
> >
> > > Hmm, what you said looked right. But as Peter pointed out [1], the
> > > fix seems too much. So I attached three version of patches. How do
> > > you think? For me, type C is best.
> > >
> > > A. A patch which completely follows your comments. The name is
> > > "v3-0001-...patch". Cfbot tests it.
> > > B. A patch which completely follows Peter's comments [1]. The
> > > name is "Peter_v3-....txt".
> > > C. A patch which follows both comments. Based on
> > > b, but some comments (Don't use the future tense, "Other
> > > characters"->"The bytes of other characters"...) were picked. The
> > > name is "Both_v3-....txt".
> >
> > I also like C.  Fewer words is better.  So long
> > as nothing is left unsaid fewer words make for clarity.
> >
> > However, in the last hunk, "of other than" does not read well.
> > Instead of writing
> > "and the bytes of other than printable ASCII characters"
> > you want "and the bytes that are not printable ASCII characters".
> > That would be my suggestion.
> >
>
> I also prefer Option C, but...
>
> ~~~
>
> +        <varname>application_name</varname> value.
> +        The bytes of other characters are replaced with
> +        <link linkend="sql-syntax-strings-escape">C-style escaped
> hexadecimal
> +        byte values</link>.
>
> V
>
> +        <varname>cluster_name</varname> value.
> +        The bytes of other characters are replaced with
> +        <link linkend="sql-syntax-strings-escape">C-style escaped
> hexadecimal
> +        byte values</link>.
>
> V
>
> +      <symbol>NAMEDATALEN</symbol> characters and the bytes of other
> than
> +      printable ASCII characters are replaced with <link
> +      linkend="sql-syntax-strings-escape">C-style escaped
> hexadecimal byte
> +      values</link>.
>
>
> IIUC all of these 3 places can have exactly the same wording change
> (e.g. like Karl's last suggestion [1]).
>
> SUGGESTION
> Any bytes that are not printable ASCII characters are replaced with
> <link linkend="sql-syntax-strings-escape">C-style escaped hexadecimal
> byte values</link>.

I don't see the utility in having exactly the same phrase everywhere,
especially since the last hunk is modifying the end of a long
sentence.  (Apologies if I'm mis-reading what Peter wrote above.)

I like short sentences.  So I prefer "The bytes of other characters"
rather than "Any bytes that are not printable ASCII characters"
for the first 2 hunks.  In context I don't see the need to repeat
the whole "printable ASCII characters" part that appears in the
preceding sentence of both hunks.  "Other" is clear, IMHO.

But because I like short sentences I now think that it's a good
idea to break the long sentence of the last hunk into two.
Add a period and use the Peter's SUGGESTION above as the
text for the second sentence.

Is this desireable?

Regards,

Karl <kop@karlpinc.com>
Free Software:  "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
                 -- Robert A. Heinlein

P.S. Hayato, it is good practice to cc everybody who has
replied to a thread.  At least I think that's what I see,
it's not just people being lazy with reply-all. So I'm
adding Tom Lane back to the thread.  He can tell us otherwise
if I'm wrong to add him back.