[Fwd: Re: Some questions to can start my work (long)]

Bruce Dubbs bdubbs at swbell.net
Sat Apr 16 16:52:23 PDT 2005



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Some questions to can start my work (long)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 18:45:37 -0500
From: Bruce Dubbs <bdubbs at swbell.net>
To: BLFS Book Maintenance List <blfs-book at linuxfromscratch.org>
References: <200504162351.24305.manuel at linuxfromscratch.org>
<42619BA9.6040103 at linuxfromscratch.org>

Randy McMurchy wrote:
> M.Canales.es wrote these words on 04/16/05 16:51 CST:

>>Also, the descriptives texts start in 
>>lowercase and end with a dot. That is just the opposite to how was done in 
>>LFS for publication purposes.
> 
> 
> And to me, the LFS way is bad grammar. Some sentences with
> punctuation and some without. It is not consistent, and using the
> reference about a "list" that Matt mentioned, I don't see it so
> much as a list. I see it as a term, with a well-structured sentence
> following it. The way I would bet most professional publications
> would do it.

There are a couple of related issues here.  One is the rendering.  I
think a table works.  The other is content.  Either we use a sentence or
not.  Neither lfs or blfs renders as a proper sentence right now.  LFS
does not uses a period to end the entry.  BLFS does not use a capital to
start one.  The blfs entry was designed to be like a sentence where we say:

someprogram-name      does this.
another-name          does that.

where the programs use the capitalization that the package developer
uses.  This means that these sentences do not normally begin with a
capital letter.  I think I prefer our existing methodology here.

My thought is to use the developer's capitalization everywhere when
referring to package or package component proper names, even when we use
them to start a sentence, index entry, or TOC entry.

  -- Bruce




More information about the blfs-dev mailing list