Re: [1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2 0001521]: here document processing is underspecified

2021-09-10 Thread Robert Elz via austin-group-l at The Open Group
Date:Fri, 10 Sep 2021 12:14:01 +0100
From:"Geoff Clare via austin-group-l at The Open Group" 

Message-ID:  <20210910111401.GA791@localhost>

  | I have changed it to .

That's fine, thanks.

kre




Re: [1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2 0001521]: here document processing is underspecified

2021-09-10 Thread Geoff Clare via austin-group-l at The Open Group
Robert Elz wrote, on 10 Sep 2021:
>
> However, you also deleted the \ between the  and the  - that one
> should be replaced if possible ( \ not just  ).

Oops. I assumed the \ was there to try to prevent the < from being taken
as an HTML tag, but I now see from the context you intended a backslash
character in the text.  I have changed it to .

> ps: is there really no way to insert the literal character sequence ""
> into a note (without the extra spaces).

Some sort of zero-width character after the < might work.

-- 
Geoff Clare 
The Open Group, Apex Plaza, Forbury Road, Reading, RG1 1AX, England



Re: [1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2 0001521]: here document processing is underspecified

2021-09-10 Thread Robert Elz via austin-group-l at The Open Group
Date:Fri, 10 Sep 2021 08:41:31 +
From:"Austin Group Bug Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open 
Group" 
Message-ID:  <2b9815f52cb2fe2472beb407a5ddd...@austingroupbugs.net>


  | I have updated the desired action to fix the problems noted in
  | https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1521#c5497.

Thanks.

  | (I removed the starting < em > rather than adding an ending < /em >
  | as italics would be incorrect there anyway.) 

That's OK, I wasn't hoping to get italics, but bold, but I know nothing
about what html tags mantis accepts (I know there's a doc somewhere, but
mantis formatting isn't a high priority for me) so I just guessed.  It
isn't as if I expect either the words I supply, or the formatting, to
survive to the final standard, they're just intended to show the meaning
that ought be conveyed.   If in some cases they happen to be OK, then
fine...

However, you also deleted the \ between the  and the  - that one
should be replaced if possible ( \ not just  ).

kre

ps: is there really no way to insert the literal character sequence ""
into a note (without the extra spaces).   I tried changing the < to  (etc)
and something just changed it back...   That's why I made so many edits of
note 5497, to try and make it say what I intended it to say, as it first
appeared it was gibberish (though the e-mail sent to the list was perfectly
understandable).   Guessing that surrounding the < and > with spaces
might help was a last resort attempt...