On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 12:36:28PM +0100, Tony Stevenson wrote:
> Please find attached an updated patch file, there are few additional
> changes, a few stupid mistakes in the original.
My suggestions follow inline. Just a few thoughts - and all my own
opinion =)
N
>
> --
> - <p>The decision of when to use SSI, and when to have your page
> - entirely generated by some program, is usually a matter of how
> + <p>The decision of when to use SSI, is usually a matter of how
> much of the page is static, and how much needs to be
I'd leave this as it is in the original (perhaps changing 'some program'
to 'some other program') - the new phrasing seems clumsy. If you want to
keep the new phrasing, please lose the comma after SSI - it was a clause
marker in the original, for a clause that's now gone =)
> - do this. You can tell Apache to parse any file with a
> + do this. You can either tell Apache to parse any file with a
I'm also not keen on this change. The 'or' is way too far away for an
'either' to make sense.
> - add SSI directives to an existing page, you would have to
> - change the name of that page, and all links to that page, in
> + add SSI directives to any existing pages, you would have to
> + change the name of those pages, and all links to them, in
change the names (unless all the pages have just one name, that they
share between them)
> + <p>You might occasionally see people recommending that you should
> + configure Apache to parse all <code>.html</code> files for SSI,
> + so that you don't have to mess with <code>.shtml</code> file names.
> + These folks have perhaps not heard about the <directive
> module="mod_include">XBitHack</directive>. The thing to
> keep in mind is that, by doing this, you're requiring that
I'd also change the 'this' - it's not clear that 'this' refers to
'telling Apache to parse everything' rather than to 'XBitHack'.
> - can slow things down quite a bit, and is not a good idea.</p>
> + can slow things down quite a bit, and is generally considered bad
> practice.</p>
>
> + <p>On Windows however, there is no such thing as an execute
> + bit, so that means you can only use the first method.</p>
'which means' (rather than 'so that means')
> <p>If you don't like the format in which the date gets printed,
> you can use the <code>config</code> element, with a
> - <code>timefmt</code> attribute, to modify that formatting.</p>
> + <code>timefmt</code> attribute, to modify the formatting.</p>
'to modify it' or 'to modify that formatting' are better English =)
> - <p>If you are managing any site that is more than a few pages,
> - you may find that making changes to all those pages can be a
> - real pain, particularly if you are trying to maintain some kind
> + <p>If you're managing any sites that are more than a few pages,
> + you may find that making changes to all those pages can be quite
> cumbersome,
> + particularly if you are trying to maintain some kind
> of standard look across all those pages.</p>
'you are' would be better than "you're", for consistency.
> - but must be on the same server as the file being served.</p>
> + but this must be on the same server as the file being served.</p>
I'd change the 'this must [...]' to 'must [...] in this case'
personally, but it's just a minor style thing.
> <p>Using the <code>set</code> directive, you can set variables
> - for later use. We'll need this later in the discussion, so
> + for later use. You'll need this later in the discussion, so
> we'll talk about it here. The syntax of this is as follows:</p>
Consistency is good - I'd leave the "We'll" here.
>
> - <p>Now that we have variables, and are able to set and compare
> - their values, we can use them to express conditionals. This
> + <p>Now that you're able to set and compare
> + variables and their values, you can use them to express conditionals.
> This
I'd rephrase this as "Now that you are able to set and compare the
values of variables" or similar - you're not really comparing the
variables as such.
> <example>
> <!--#if expr="${Mac} && ${InternetExplorer}" --><br />
> - Apologetic text goes here<br />
> + Text string 1 goes here<br />
> <!--#else --><br />
> - Cool JavaScript code goes here<br />
> + Text string 2 goes here<br />
> <!--#endif -->
> </example>
Actually, the old stuff, while potentially perjorative, is clearer, I
think. Perhaps you could change it to "You're using Internet Explorer on
a Mac" vs "You're not using Internet Explorer on a Mac"
...
That's a pretty comprehensive patch, thanks again Tony =)
Noirin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
