Re: Please respect line length limitation in www.debian.org source
Hi Steve,
On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 07:45:54PM +0000, Steve Kemp wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 08:00:13PM +0100, Jens Seidel wrote:
> > I will try to fix this, but it is not easy since it may confuse
> > translators, who want to update outdated translations and have to
> > analyse these diffs.
>
> Would it be worth my while to breakup the English versions first,
> or would that be unduly confusing? As the person responsible I guess
> I should like to help fix if I can do so.
It would be nice if you could perform this. I have only very minor
changes:
faq.wml: s/ - /—/
s,href="/,href="$(HOME)/, (to allow mirroring, I hope $(HOME)
expands to a relative path to use files on mirror not
www.debian.org)
s/faq">/faq#discover">/
tools.wml: s/1-5/1–5/ (always use an en-dash for from--to values)
s/a HTML/an HTML/
examples/RATS.wml: s/a HTML/an HTML/
examples/flawfinder.wml: s/a HTML/an HTML/
Please try to contact translators first and request an update when
translations are outdated. Than commit only line break changes
and update translation-check headers yourself (when the old one are
up-to-date) and than perform changes to content (now you cannot bump
translation-check headers, unless you speak a few foreign languages).
You see, it's not so easy ...
> > PS: Maybe we should not give people write access without pointers to
> > style guides and www.debian.org/devel/website. I also suggest that
> > people send patches to this list before they get write access.
>
> For what it's worth I've read those pages and I see no mention
> of any line lenght restriction.
You're right. But someone should really add it.
> I chose to use a single line per paragraph as that seemed natural,
> but now that you've drawn attention to it I do see that other areas
> of the site seem not to be in this style.
I wrote the mail to ensure that new documents do not have such long
lines. My intent was not to zing. So don't worry, it just happened ...
> I guess there are guidelines which I've missed but certainly not
> in the link you refer to above.
Indeed, but the mentioned URL should be the most suitable one.
Jens
Reply to: