From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (pb-smtp1.pobox.com [64.147.108.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E5DC1C20 for ; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 17:31:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708536694; cv=none; b=Tz+5HuubxH0pdThiRsXYWI5VYJBRBnh9RS2dQQtlanQutiItFK4rllxWUcCyS0RCFxa+jZUUJ3rOh2lDVcmrWSCnCd2/7EKuU6UPNlM1DMIRordx2qFYsSlhNu+ZdEyPnTCTg83pYBzQjtlUrNhVhD8bSY5kMNUwxllYJAmM1+k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708536694; c=relaxed/simple; bh=BFzwzzs91k/ZygiyMVWD69cTIjVcCX9KjIMq26I6HbM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=fbn/8B83ROLfvLbTgsxpaSrUnJ/TMAwnd7iz8qu6qHoNR7Gc40digoREs2AKzq4MTy7AvyxfbYDz0dbD6MH26W8k3Zk0ZjDuJ86gb0//krHGY9laVRQEFzA6+4l6p63oi7KaACfRR64svXGEKBiUX4+gRkMYGtLJ/ck0D8PUHE4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=xDvzZ3oD; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="xDvzZ3oD" Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 012F91C3AA8; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 12:31:32 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=BFzwzzs91k/Z ygiyMVWD69cTIjVcCX9KjIMq26I6HbM=; b=xDvzZ3oDFz4FoF+JZ+uSAkoh5EB8 YVDhhcPf6f2r5YRI3tE8smSrU03IRZ2cAS3FvYLgC++D7G87Akrk84JrTelaWpt8 ADhNeZ6rDSxoFHx16Vr3acO/hOtKVkX+U1UVaW1fxRkH+PbmcSlVK+evyOXxRj0r 5GcQ0YjYJ5zMM5A= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDF531C3AA6; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 12:31:31 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.176.30]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 548131C3AA5; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 12:31:31 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?Q?Jean-No=C3=ABl?= Avila Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Jean-No=C3=ABl?= Avila via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] doc: git-rev-parse: enforce command-line description syntax In-Reply-To: <67dca173-3048-430b-88a1-d3b5d853f84b@free.fr> (=?utf-8?Q?=22?= =?utf-8?Q?Jean-No=C3=ABl?= Avila"'s message of "Wed, 21 Feb 2024 08:41:48 +0100") References: <17b0284c379e62a756e1bba008f4671f6afc0ad9.1708468374.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> <67dca173-3048-430b-88a1-d3b5d853f84b@free.fr> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 09:31:30 -0800 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 0D3F54AA-D0DF-11EE-9C19-78DCEB2EC81B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Jean-No=C3=ABl Avila writes: >>> ---short[=3Dlength]:: >>> +--short[=3D]:: >>> Same as `--verify` but shortens the object name to a unique >>> prefix with at least `length` characters. The minimum length >> This same comment applies throughout this patch, but in other places >> when we use in the option argument description, don't >> we use the same in text as well? I am wondering if >> the `length` (typeset in fixed-width) should become . What >> do other recent[*] documentation pages commonly do? > > This is another part of the inconsistences in documentation that I'd > like to tackle (hopefully, not in another life). > > Using angle brackets for placeholders everywhere they appear is a > visual link to the preceding syntax description, but may feel a bit > heavy on some cases. Anyway, I'm all for applying the rule everywhere, > for the sake of consistency. I agree that if is not an appropriate way to spell them in the explanation text, we would want to change them consistently everywhere, and until then, using the angle-bracketted that is common would be better. The text will be modified again when we decide to switch from to something else, so updating them now may be a wasted effort, but (1) we may decide that is good enough after all, or (2) it may make it easier to mechanically identify words whose mark-up should be converted if we consistently use now, even if we know it won't be the final mark-up. So I am inclined to say that we should first do `length` -> in the body text in the short term. But I also think we should *not* do so as part of this patch, whose focus is how the option enumeration header should mark up the option arguments. > Backticks and single quotes are used indistinctively (by the way, > asciidoctor does not process single quotes as markup) and are not used > everywhere they should. Using backticks is also a good hint for > translators to mean "verbatim, do not translate". Obviously, the > placeholders ask for translation, so the backtick rule should not > apply to them, even if another formating would be welcome : > __ for instance? Yes. The way AsciiDoc renders (at least HTML) an unadorned is not so great. In "git-add.html" manual page, we see these examples. The first one (unadorned) does not make the placeholder word stand out enough; the second one that does `` makes it stand out better, but as you said, the `verbatim` mark-up is semantically wrong. https://git.github.io/htmldocs/git-add.html#:~:text=3DFor%20more%20detail= s%20about%20the%20%3Cpathspec%3E%20syntax https://git.github.io/htmldocs/git-add.html#:~:text=3DPathspec%20is%20pas= sed%20in%20%3Cfile%3E%20instead%20of%20commandline%20args.%20If%20%3Cfile= %3E%20is%20exactly%20%2D%20then%20standard%20input%20is%20used.%20Pathspe= c The last part of the Documentation/CodingGuidelines document talks about how to mark up placeholders but it does not go beyond saying that they are written as . Whatever mark-up rule we decide to use, we should document it there. Thanks.