GNU bug report logs - #16803
@kbd for long option names?

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 16803 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 16803 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: karl <at> freefriends.org (Karl Berry)
To: bug-coreutils <at> gnu.org
Subject: @kbd for long option names?
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 23:57:28 GMT

I just realized that, at some point, the coreutils manual started using
@kbd for long option names, as in:

@item -b
@itemx @w{@kbd{--backup}[=@var{method}]}

Why?  Semantically, long option names are not keyboard input.
Practically, I find the result pretty suboptimal in the printed output,
at least, since the -b is typeset in upright typewriter and --backup in
slanted typewriter, even though they are synonyms.

I'm happy to send a patch to remove all the @kbd's if you'll accept it,
but I imagine you had a reason to insert them in the first place.
Surely I didn't use them when I translated some of the original
descriptions?!  Can't say I remember [anything] with 100% certainty :).

karl

Message #8 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
To: bug-coreutils <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#16803: @kbd for long option names?
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 22:32:53 -0800

Karl Berry wrote:
> I'm happy to send a patch to remove all the @kbd's if you'll accept it,
> but I imagine you had a reason to insert them in the first place.

Beats me as to why they're there, and I don't think anybody'll mind if 
they go.

Message #11 received at 16803 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Assaf Gordon <assafgordon <at> gmail.com>
To: 16803 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#16803: @kbd for long option names?
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 15:42:19 -0600

tags 16803 fixed
close 16803
stop

(triaging old bugS)

Hello Karl,

On 18/02/14 11:32 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Karl Berry wrote:
>> I'm happy to send a patch to remove all the @kbd's if you'll accept it,
>> but I imagine you had a reason to insert them in the first place.
> 
> Beats me as to why they're there, and I don't think anybody'll mind if 
> they go.

As of the latest git version, there's only one line with @kbd:
===
$ grep "@kbd" doc/coreutils.texi
Enable XON/XOFF flow control (that is, @kbd{Ctrl-S}/@kbd{Ctrl-Q}).  May
===


So closing as "fixed".

-assaf

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.