On Wed, 2005-05-04 at 01:46 -0500, Thomas Jones wrote: > Hello all, > > As per a recent conversation, I have generated a patch for the general > entity file --- fedora-entities-en.xml. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156771 > > There were a great many changes that I have made. Not all may be > accepted into CVS; but I believe that these changes provide good value > to the project. Most surely will. This is great work, thanks. As you know, work on a good entities scheme at the beginning will save hours of work in the future. I strongly encourage everyone to review these proposed changes, especially if you have written with DocBook before. > As you review the changes, please keep the following "open" issues in mind: > - this file is incorrectly identified as xml. When in fact, it does not > contain any XML markup at all. Just a thought. In keeping with > standardization, it should be something like en.fedora.dbgenent.ent. > But, thats just personal preference. ;) dbgenent? Otherwise, yeah, I've seen the *.ent designation before, that makes sense. > - if the "bluecurve" entity is accepted; does the <interfacedefinition/> > element suffice as the parent node with its expected context? I don't see that element, do you mean <interfacename>? Regardless, AIUI that is an interface for OO programming and not a user interface. I would capitalize "Bluecurve" and leave it alone without a special tag, after all, it's just a name. > - if the "rpm" entity is accepted; what is its legal status? registered > or trademark? Not sure, but I think it's irrelevant. My understanding is that we may replace most of the legal trademark boilerplate with a line like this: "All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners." I'll hunt up a better sentence than that one. I had this confirmed from Red Hat legal last year. After you have properly attributed a trademark in the boilerplate, you can use the mark in the text without a (TM) or (R). However, you -must- use the term properly, e.g.: Red Hat -not- RedHat FireWire -not- firewire RPM -not- rpm etc. This is a best effort thing, anyone who finds an improper spelling of a trademark should just file a bug report. :) BTW, Red Hat style is to usually to refer to "software packages" and not call them "RPMs". I agree because it keeps things generic and not using jargon unnecessarily. > - i neglected to utilize the common ISO entity declarations for > readability. New authors find it difficult to read if utilized; yet > translators probably need the ISO declarations. I prefer ISO --- but > then again i am weird. ;) How about we do this in two passes? Get all the details worked out, then consider ISO entity declarations. - Karsten -- Karsten Wade, RHCE * Sr. Tech Writer * http://people.redhat.com/kwade/ gpg fingerprint: 2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115 5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41 Red Hat SELinux Guide http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/selinux-guide/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
