Package: debian-policy Version: 3.9.2.0 Severity: normal Summary: Section 5.1 contain 1. non precise reference to ASCII characters 2. Two phrasing issues.
Quoting http://lists.debian.org/debian-l10n-english/2011/11/msg00002.html --- On Fri, 11/4/11, Justin B Rye <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Justin B Rye <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: following the same syntax as the continuation lines the folded > fields > To: [email protected] > Cc: "Regid Ichira" <[email protected]> > Date: Friday, November 4, 2011, 1:29 PM > Regid Ichira wrote: > > Regarding `following the same syntax as the > continuation lines the > > folded fields': > > Is a relating word missing? Should the last > `the' replaced with > > `of', or `in', and read `following the same syntax as > the > > continuation lines of folded fields'? > > > > The context is > > http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-controlsyntax: > > > >> multiline > >> The value of a multiline field may comprise > multiple continuation > >> lines. The first line of the value, the part > on the same line as > >> the field name, often has special > significance or may have to be > >> empty. Other lines are added following the > same syntax as the > >> continuation lines the folded fields. > Whitespace, including > >> newlines, is significant in the values of > multiline fields. > > Yes, there's definitely a missing preposition there, and I > would > agree that "following the same syntax as the continuation > lines of > folded fields" is the most natural fix. > > In fact I notice another problem earlier in section 5.1: > > >> Each paragraph consists of a series of data > fields; each field > >> consists of the field name, followed by a colon > and then the > >> data/value associated with that field. The field > name is composed > >> of printable ASCII characters (i.e., characters > that have values > >> between 33 and 126, inclusive) except colon and > must not with a > >> begin with #. > > That last sentence has some jumbled or maybe just redundant > words. > > Less importantly, it refers to ASCII 58 by name ("colon") > but > inconsistently identifies ASCII 35 just as "#". The > problem is of > course that hash/pound/numbersign/octothorpe has no > universally > recognised name, so maybe it would be better to standardise > in the > other direction. > > On top of everything else, many authorities include space > (and even > tab) as "printable" characters. Instead of opening > that can of worms > I would suggest just quoting the range: > > The field name must be composed of ASCII > characters in the range > [!-~] other than ":", and must not begin > with "#". > > -- > JBR with qualifications in linguistics, > experience as a Debian > sysadmin, and probably no clue about > this particular package > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
