Bug 123267 - Example for filename tag is wrong
Summary: Example for filename tag is wrong
Alias: None
Product: Fedora Documentation
Classification: Fedora
Component: docs-requests
Version: devel
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Tammy Fox
QA Contact: Tammy Fox
URL: http://fedora.redhat.com/participate/...
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2004-05-15 03:06 UTC by Paul W. Frields
Modified: 2009-07-07 04:08 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2004-08-12 21:11:11 UTC

Attachments (Terms of Use)
Patch to fix tags from "command" to "filename" (901 bytes, patch)
2004-05-15 03:09 UTC, Paul W. Frields
no flags Details | Diff

Description Paul W. Frields 2004-05-15 03:06:10 UTC
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4.1)

Description of problem:
The example given for the <filename> tag incorrectly uses the
<command> tag instead.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:
1. View guide.
2. Quiver with confusion.    

Actual Results:  I was confused, but only for a moment. Thank goodness
Karsten and Tammy are there to steady us! :-)

Expected Results:  The example should use the tag it illustrates,

Additional info:

Comment 1 Paul W. Frields 2004-05-15 03:09:27 UTC
Created attachment 100243 [details]
Patch to fix tags from "command" to "filename"

I'll be in Raleigh 5/16/04 - 5/21/04... would like to buy any FDP members a
tasty beverage of their choice if you're available.

Comment 2 Gregory Leblanc 2004-08-02 17:05:35 UTC
As long as things are getting changed in this section of the docs,
redhat-config-* should probably get replaced with system-config-*

Also, <filename> isn't the correct tag here, since we're not talking
about an actual file name.  Perhaps <application> is the best choice

Comment 3 Paul W. Frields 2004-08-02 17:34:09 UTC
Neither one is a 100% perfect fit. However, the Documentation Guide
explicitly states that <filename> should be used for RPM package
names; see
for more info. Since the package itself is not something that is
executable, that's a sensible choice to me, and I'm not in favor of
changing it.

Comment 4 Gregory Leblanc 2004-08-03 06:35:41 UTC
Ah, you were just trying to fix the inconsistency between the text
written and the actual markup used. 

I'm not in favor of using <filename> for rpm package names, because
package names are NOT file names.  This has actually bitten folks in
the past, though not Red Hat or Fedora, AFAIK (caused all kind of
confusion for SuSE users of old).  

Also, according to TDG, the application tag is for "The name of a
software program."  It also suggests that "The appelation
âapplicationâ is usually reserved for larger software packages."  I'd
say that in most cases, this applies directly to rpm package names. 
Perhaps a role attribute could help clarify this.  I'll try to poke
through the archives and see if anything has been discussed previously.

Comment 5 Tammy Fox 2004-08-12 21:11:11 UTC
Thanks. Your changes have been made in CVS (file version 1.7).

Comment 6 eric@christensenplace.us 2009-07-07 04:08:14 UTC
Ticket moved to allow products to be removed from BZ.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.