Re: Add A Glossary
| От | Fabien COELHO |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Add A Glossary |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | alpine.DEB.2.21.2004050925090.16227@pseudo обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Add A Glossary (Corey Huinker <corey.huinker@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Add A Glossary
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Corey, >> ISTM that occurrences of these words elsewhere in the documentation should >> link to the glossary definitions? > > Yes, that's a big project. I was considering writing a script to compile > all the terms as search terms, paired with their glossary ids, and then > invoke git grep to identify all pages that have term FOO but don't have > glossary-foo. We would then go about gloss-linking those pages as > appropriate, but only a few pages at a time to keep scope sane. Id go for scripting the thing. Should the glossary be backpatched, to possibly ease doc patchpatches? > Also, I'm unclear about the circumstances under which we should _not_ > tag a term. At least when then are explained locally. > I remember hearing that we should only tag it on the first usage, but is > that per section or per page? Page? >> As the definitions are short and to the point, maybe the HTML display >> could (also) "hover" the definitions when the mouse passes over the word, >> using the "title" attribute? > > I like that idea, if it doesn't conflict with accessibility standards > (maybe that's just titles on images, not sure). The following worked fine: <html><head><title>Title Tag Test</title></head> <body>The <a href="acid.html" title="ACID stands for Atomic, Consistent, Isolated & Durable">ACID</a> property is great. </body></html> So basically the def can be put on the glossary link, however retrieving the definition should be automatic. > I suspect we would want to just carry over the first sentence or so with a > ... to avoid cluttering the screen with my overblown definition of a > sequence. Dunno. The definitions are quite short, maybe the can fit whole. > I suggest we pursue this idea in another thread, as we'd probably want to > do it for acronyms as well. Or not. I'd test committer temperature before investing time because it would mean that backpatching the doc would be a little harder. >> Entries could link to relevant wikipedia pages, like the acronyms section >> does? > > They could. I opted not to do that because each external link invites > debate about how authoritative that link is, which is easier to do with > acronyms. Now that the glossary is a reality, it's easier to have those > discussions. Ok. -- Fabien.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: