On Wed, 2005-11-23 at 16:12 -0500, Brad Smith wrote: > Tommy Reynolds wrote: > > Uttered Brad Smith <brads@xxxxxxxxxx>, spake thus: > >>I think it would look inconsistent if only these instructions were > >>treated as regular text so, for our purposes, I think we > >>definitely need to tag it with something, I'm just unsure what. > > > > Well, <userinput>:wq</userinput>, of course. <keycode> and <keycap> > > are not "key strokes", they are silkscreen labels and ROM values. > > Ok, so a good way of codifying this would be: > > For typed-in characters, use <userinput>. Nonprintable characters should > be wrapped in <keycap> eg: > > Enter: <userinput>Heading 1 <keycap>Tab<keycap> Heading 2 > <keycap>Enter</keycap></userinput> into a text document to begin a > simple table. I'm not sure if I got Tommy's meaning right, but I think what he was getting at didn't have to do with the difference between printable and nonprintable characters, but rather the difference between something the user types and sees echoed on the screen (like ":wq" in the vi example), as opposed to Ctrl+Alt+Del. The former would be a <userinput>, while the latter would be a <keycombo>. At least that's how I took it. And if that's not what he meant, well, the above is what I think makes sense semantically and procedurally. In Emacs, for example (hush, Tommy) ;-) -- you might turn on a mode by using a combination of these physical actions, like M-x rpm-specfile-mode, which would be: <keycombo> <keycap>Meta</keycap> <!-- Alt if you only care about non-PCs --> <keycap>x</keycap> </keycombo> <userinput>rpm-specfile-mode</userinput> -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
