Re: GDP: chattiness in @seealso

[Graham Percival]

Eyolf Østrem wrote:
> On 14.11.2007 (16:18), Graham Percival wrote:
> >  I have a slight preference against #2 (sentences everywhere), since IMO
>
> I know you have, and you know this is the one I prefer. Giving a hint at
> WHY one should seealso ain't fluff. This isn't dungeons and dragons ("you
> are in a dark cave. To the east there is a link to Proportional notation,
> to the south is a snippet." etc).

I think you mean "this isn't zork", not D&D.  :)

> >  in most cases it's obvious why somebody might want to look at other
> >  section.
>
> ... I'd say that in SOME cases it's obvious, but in many it's not, and if a
> general rule is needed, I'd go for 2 (with 3 as a variant). 

Well, you're the one who'll have to go through and write sentences for 
every single @seealso section, so it's no skin off my back... what about 
the new Durations?  (see tomorrow's GDP; should be online in about two 
hours.  If you're not certain if you're seeing the updated ones or not: 
the updated one stick things in an itemized list)

At the very least, I want it clear which sentence refer to the Notation 
Reference, and which sentences refer to the other parts of the docs.

... I _really_ think this is completely unnecessary, though.  And if you 
want to add full sentences to every single notation reference @ref{}, I 
assume you want to do the same for every @lsr{dir,snippet}, every 
@internalsref{}, etc ?


Mats, you're the yardstick for efficient NR use.  What do you think of 
the compact vs. full sentence form of @seealso ?  I don't want to 
approve any change that makes the NR harder to use for knowledgeable 
users, and IMO this is one such change.

Cheers,
- Graham