Subject: Re: bug#52765: 26.3; Elisp manual, use of the term "field"

From: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2021 09:22:16 +0200

tags 52765 wontfix
close 52765
thanks

> From: Drew Adams <[email-masked]>
> Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2021 01:25:03 +0000
> 
> In any case, this bug report is about the Elisp manual.  There, "field"
> is used very little, except in node `Fields'.  My suggestion is to use
> "field" in that manual only with the meaning presented in that node.
> The other occurrences of "field" in the manual could usefully employ a
> different word, to avoid confusion.

I've now reviewed all the uses of "field" in the ELisp manual, and I
don't see anything problematic with that.  Moreover, replacing it with
something else would produce in many cases awkward and potentially
confusing wording.

There's no need to be afraid of using the word "field" in its natural
meaning just because we have a feature by that name.

Closing.