Follow-up Comment #8, bug #66103 (group groff): Hello Branden, thanks for handling the report. I'll note down where you are not in agreement with the report, so it won't be reported again in the future.
Regarding the questions raised, here is my reply. It's a bit tough in this
form, so please accept that citing is difficult.
1. Man rules:
If in doubt, I look at man-pages(7). I'm not judging it, but given also this
thread, I noticed e.g. the following changes:
-Any reference to another man page should be written with the name in bold
-The list below shows conventional or suggested sections.
Again, no judgement, just an observation.
2. No E<.MR ..> does not mean error. It is a way for po4a to express to insert
the new MR macro.
3. List styles/colons: I've seen (also in other context) different
conventions, but I'm not a native speaker, so I simply wanted to point this
(potential) issue out. (And see comment #7)
4. Regarding ISO/IEC: I know the difference, I'm editor of several ISO/IEC
standards and I double checked each proposal. This was *not* done blindly.
(And yes, this is ISO 9001, I'm aware).
If you want to check yourself:
Insert the standard number in question in www.iso.org. If it comes from
ISO/IEC JTC1 (the group responsible for joint standards), then it is written
out. (This is what I did for *every* report on this matter).
I was basically correcting it as "IEC" is often left out, even though it is a
joint standard.
5.Regarding cross reference - I acknowledge your decision, I'm personally fond
of have more then less cross references or bold typeface for self reference. I
think it helps for consistency and do not feel it "nosy". But again, this is
just my personal impression. (In agreement with Comment 4)
6. Regarding the decision to have different terms in the synopsis and later on
in the man page - ok, I'm just worried it might confuse readers. But again, I
did not do any study on this.
And thank you very much for the long explanations.
Greetings
Helge
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?66103>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
