From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28466 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2000 08:32:24 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 29 Aug 2000 08:32:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 23343 invoked by alias); 29 Aug 2000 08:31:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 12718 Received: (qmail 23336 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2000 08:31:48 -0000 Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 10:31:46 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <200008290831.KAA16294@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> From: Sven Wischnowsky To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk In-reply-to: "Bart Schaefer"'s message of Tue, 29 Aug 2000 06:22:10 +0000 Subject: Re: PATCH: Document REPLY/reply, misc. other parameter indexing Bart Schaefer wrote: > ... > > I wish I could figure out when the docs are intended to use `tt(foo)' and > when just tt(foo) without the ticks. (The difficulty is that in info the > typewriter face is lost and you can't see the emphasis without the `...'.) > I chose to make nearby paragraphs consistent with each other, even if things > aren't consistent across more widely separated uses. There's a bit about it in the Etc/zsh-development-guide. But in some cases... (I think Peter and I were changing things back and forth in the completion system documentation some time ago). For example, the documentation of the ignore-parents style. Sometimes tt(../), sometimes `tt(../)'. It may even be consistent, but doesn't look good, I think. So, if you want to change the standard... ;-) Bye Sven -- Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de