On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 7:52 AM Joel Jacobson <j...@compiler.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2024, at 02:59, David G. Johnston wrote: > > Though there was no comment on the fact we should be linking to: > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access-control_list > > > > not: > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access_Control_List > > > > to avoid the dis-ambiguation redirect. > > > > If we are making wikipedia our authority we might as well use their > > standard for naming. > > Good point. > > Want me to fix that or will the committer handle that? > > I found some more similar cases in acronyms.sgml. > > -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluggable_Authentication_Modules > +https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluggable_authentication_module > -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Manipulation_Language > +https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_manipulation_language > -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OLTP > +https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_transaction_processing > -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Definition_Language > +https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_definition_language > -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORDBMS > +https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object%E2%80%93relational_database > -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GMT > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object%E2%80%93relational_database-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GMT> > +https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwich_Mean_Time > -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relational_database_management_system > +https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relational_database#RDBMS > -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olap > -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Issn > +https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_analytical_processing > +https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISSN > -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_V > +https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNIX_System_V > -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_C++ > +https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Visual_C%2B%2B > -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SGML > +https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Generalized_Markup_Language > -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascii > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Generalized_Markup_Language-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascii> > +https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASCII > -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dbms > +https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database#Database_management_system > -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Git_(software) > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database#Database_management_system-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Git_(software)> > +https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Git > -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utf8 > +https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTF-8 > -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Sockets_Layer > + > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_Layer_Security#SSL_1.0,_2.0,_and_3.0 > > Below is the script I used to find them, > which also reports some additional false positives: > > Given this I'd be OK with committing as-is in the name of matching existing project style. Then bringing up this inconsistency as a separate concern to be bulk fixed as part of implementing a new policy on what to check for and conform to when establishing acronyms in our documentation. Otherwise the author (you) should make the change here - the committer wouldn't be expected to know to do that from the discussion. David J.
