[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: C-h r and Images

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: C-h r and Images
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 18:59:36 +0300

> Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2013 16:56:14 +0800
> From: Xue Fuqiao <address@hidden>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden>, Paul Eggert <address@hidden>,
>       Jambunathan K <address@hidden>, emacs-devel <address@hidden>
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 2:10 AM, Drew Adams <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> Btw, looking at Glossary for Window, I am surprised that I don't know
> >> what (q.v.) stands for.  The Emacs crowd *was* scholarly and academic
> >> and it is to some extent even so today.  But using things like q.v. etc
> >> and assuming that it will be understood by *lay* crowd is a bit too much
> >> for the asking...
> >
> > Yes, it's silly, if not downright pretentious in this context.
> >
> > What's more, it would be helpful to hyperlink directly to an explanation
> > of the term in question, rather than just saying "which see" or some such
> > English alternative to "q.v."
> I made a patch for it.  See bug#15254.

Thanks.  However, I'm not sure doing this is useful.  The Glossary is
a long series of short paragraphs, each one explaining one term.  What
your patch does is add a cross-reference to many of these short
paragraphs, which makes those paragraphs longer and more complex to
read and grasp at first glance.  OTOH, since the terms are listed in
alphabetic order, it is quite easy to find a given term, even if you
just scroll and don't use the search commands.

So my take of this is that on balance this is not useful.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]