<command> vs <application>

[Karsten Wade]

On Thu, 2005-09-08 at 15:57 -0400, Brad Smith wrote:
> > <screen>
> > <userinput><command>cd</command> <filename>foo</filename>
> > <command>./bar</command> <option>-o baaz</option> 
> > <command>cat</command> <filename>baaz</filename></userinput>
> > <computeroutput>[contents of baaz]</computeroutput>
> > </screen>
> 
> 
> Another element missing from this, which it would be nice to adopt a
> standard for for consistency's sake, is the input prompt. The current
> GLS standard (as of last week) is:
> 
> <prompt>[student at stationX ~]$</prompt> 
> 
> unless a different user, host or cwd is specifically warranted. The
> stationX has to do with the way systems are named in our classrooms
> (station1, station2, etc), so it might not make a good FDP or Red
> Hat-wide convention, but a standard of some sort would be good
> nonetheless.

We've had a convention of not including the prompt at all.  This is
different from other UNIX documentation.  However, I don't think anyone
has complained.

My guess is, the prompt was dropped for clarity sake?  In RH docs, we
use <prompt> only when specifically discussing the prompt, otherwise
it's left out for visual clarity, I reckon.

- Karsten
-- 
Karsten Wade, RHCE * Sr. Tech Writer * http://people.redhat.com/kwade/
gpg fingerprint:  2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115    5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41   
                       Red Hat SELinux Guide
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/selinux-guide/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/attachments/20050908/b9afbe0e/attachment.sig>