Bug 2060904

Summary:	[DDF] Planning Guide: List of unsupported features on IBM uses double-negative logic and is hard to understand
Product:	[Red Hat Storage] Red Hat OpenShift Data Foundation	Reporter:	Direct Docs Feedback <ddf-bot>
Component:	documentation	Assignee:	Aaruni Aggarwal <aaaggarw>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:	Olive Lakra <olakra>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:	Olive Lakra <olakra>
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	4.9	CC:	asriram, mmuench, ocs-bugs, odf-bz-bot, olakra
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	FutureFeature, NoDocsQEReview
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	All
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2022-09-08 14:09:06 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Direct Docs Feedback 2022-03-04 13:44:39 UTC

Planning Guide: List of unsupported features on IBM uses double-negative logic and is hard to understand

The list in table 10.1 chapter UNSUPPORTED FEATURES FOR IBM POWER AND IBM Z INFRASTRUCTURE lists unsupported features and uses negative logic based on the description. This is hard to understand and might be read wrongly.

Instead of basing the content of the table on the description, it would be better to use terms of "supported" and "unsupported" for the entries.

Reported by: matthiasmuench

https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_openshift_data_foundation/4.9/html/planning_your_deployment/unsupported-features#annotations:114a4ea8-e87a-471b-ba05-c8da05787fee

Comment 3 Aaruni Aggarwal 2022-03-14 07:30:36 UTC

Hi @mmuench  

Have created a google doc with the changes : 
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RnCS7vRnT3PmTVD0iw3mxKEvsLUOB7yJuxjanNHrrdU/edit?usp=sharing

Is this correct? If so, then I will make the changes in the Planning guide as well.

Comment 5 Matthias Muench 2022-06-23 07:19:09 UTC

Looks good to me. Thanks.