Noah Slater a écrit : >> I'd suggest expanding what RDF is, at least in the long description..... Even >> better would be expanding it in the synopsis of course. > > I disargree with you on this point. If the user doesn't know what RDF is they > certainly don't want to install the package and knowing the definition isn't > going to change much. Similarly, you wouldn't expand GTK or HTTP or NFS if the > package was providing a developer library to deal wich such things.
Sorry, this is precisely rationale I fight against. Just saying "if you don't know what this is, you don't need this" defeats the purpose of packages descriptions. If that's the case why not just use cryptic packages descriptions so that only Those Who have The Knowledge can use them. There is room to give some hint to users. Why not use it? Comparing this to very widely spread acronyms such as HTTP and GTK is comparing apples and oranges. Also don't neglect the help provided by Debian packages to ppl who sometimes wonder about things they see here or there. Good packages descriptions benefit everybody and we all have tons of things to learn.
