Обсуждение: some new glossary entries
I wrote glossary entries for some terms I wanted to look up there but didn't find: "restartpoint" and "LSN". I put this together based on existing text. "LSN" was already in the acronyms list but I think it's more appropriate in the glossary, so I moved things around a bit.
Вложения
> On 2 May 2023, at 09:05, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > I wrote glossary entries for some terms I wanted to look up there but didn't find: "restartpoint" and "LSN". I put thistogether based on existing text. "LSN" was already in the acronyms list but I think it's more appropriate in the glossary,so I moved things around a bit. +1 LGTM. + <glossentry id="glossary-lsn"> + <glossterm>LSN</glossterm> + <glosssee otherterm="glossary-log-sequence-number"/> + </glossentry> The other <glosssee otherterm="foo" /> entries doesn't have a glossentry id attribute set, is the use here related to the glossentry.show.acronym param? -- Daniel Gustafsson
On 2023-May-02, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > + <glossentry id="glossary-lsn"> > + <glossterm>LSN</glossterm> > + <glosssee otherterm="glossary-log-sequence-number"/> > + </glossentry> > > The other <glosssee otherterm="foo" /> entries doesn't have a glossentry id > attribute set, is the use here related to the glossentry.show.acronym param? I debated with myself for 347d2b07fcc2 on whether to add id attribs to <glosssee> entries. The only saving grace for doing that is that you can link to such entries; but if you do that, you're only causing the user one more click in order to see the definition they want to see. So in the end I decided not make the glosssee's directly referenceable. And I think this new entry shouldn't have an id either. I think that what glossentry.show.acronym allows is to show the <acronym> text that's part of the main entry: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28869578/docbook-5-rendering-without-abbrev-tag/28879785#28879785 so the fact that there's an id in the other entry doesn't change anything. If we do turn glossentry.show.acronym on (and I don't see any reason not to), we can follow up later to add <acronym> and <abbrev> tags to other entries, too. -- Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ "I'm always right, but sometimes I'm more right than other times." (Linus Torvalds) https://lore.kernel.org/git/Pine.LNX.4.58.0504150753440.7211@ppc970.osdl.org/
> On 2 May 2023, at 12:24, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: > > On 2023-May-02, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > >> + <glossentry id="glossary-lsn"> >> + <glossterm>LSN</glossterm> >> + <glosssee otherterm="glossary-log-sequence-number"/> >> + </glossentry> >> >> The other <glosssee otherterm="foo" /> entries doesn't have a glossentry id >> attribute set, is the use here related to the glossentry.show.acronym param? > > I debated with myself for 347d2b07fcc2 on whether to add id attribs to > <glosssee> entries. The only saving grace for doing that is that you > can link to such entries; but if you do that, you're only causing the > user one more click in order to see the definition they want to see. So > in the end I decided not make the glosssee's directly referenceable. > And I think this new entry shouldn't have an id either. Agreed, that makes sense. > I think that what glossentry.show.acronym allows is to show the > <acronym> text that's part of the main entry: > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28869578/docbook-5-rendering-without-abbrev-tag/28879785#28879785 > so the fact that there's an id in the other entry doesn't change > anything. > > If we do turn glossentry.show.acronym on (and I don't see any reason not > to), we can follow up later to add <acronym> and <abbrev> tags to other > entries, too. +1 -- Daniel Gustafsson
On 02.05.23 12:55, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >> On 2 May 2023, at 12:24, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: >> >> On 2023-May-02, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >> >>> + <glossentry id="glossary-lsn"> >>> + <glossterm>LSN</glossterm> >>> + <glosssee otherterm="glossary-log-sequence-number"/> >>> + </glossentry> >>> >>> The other <glosssee otherterm="foo" /> entries doesn't have a glossentry id >>> attribute set, is the use here related to the glossentry.show.acronym param? >> >> I debated with myself for 347d2b07fcc2 on whether to add id attribs to >> <glosssee> entries. The only saving grace for doing that is that you >> can link to such entries; but if you do that, you're only causing the >> user one more click in order to see the definition they want to see. So >> in the end I decided not make the glosssee's directly referenceable. >> And I think this new entry shouldn't have an id either. > > Agreed, that makes sense. > >> I think that what glossentry.show.acronym allows is to show the >> <acronym> text that's part of the main entry: >> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28869578/docbook-5-rendering-without-abbrev-tag/28879785#28879785 >> so the fact that there's an id in the other entry doesn't change >> anything. >> >> If we do turn glossentry.show.acronym on (and I don't see any reason not >> to), we can follow up later to add <acronym> and <abbrev> tags to other >> entries, too. > > +1 Committed with the recommended changes.