Redundancy is only part of the cost. Historically, when they replicate information on syntax for other components, they get it wrong.
The ISPF Edit Ref. does give REXX examples, but there are issues with some of them. The lack of synchronization would have been easy to fix had IBM continued using BookManager markup instead of WYSIAYG word processors. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on behalf of Paul Gilmartin [[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, February 6, 2022 7:32 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Does this make no sense or is it just me? On Sun, 6 Feb 2022 12:59:03 -0800, Charles Mills wrote: >There was a tendency to put every topic in every manual. I have an OS/VS >COBOL P/G in front of me (1981) and it includes a lot of JCL tutorial: there >is an entire three-page section titled "Examples of DD Statements Used To >Create Data Sets." > Yes. The TSO Rexx Ref. tries to teach too much TSO syntax. The ISPF Edit Ref. tries to teach too much CLIST syntax. (Why not Rexx, if anything. But it's getting better lately.) The cost of this is the burden of redundant updates if the command environment changes. And the risk of failure to synchronize updates. The JCL Ref. has separate chapters for "DD *" and "DD DATA". Parts have been copied from one to the other without needed changes. I've suggested in vain that they be consolidated with side notes for the very few differences. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
