From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-documentation <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Doc reference of contrib modules |
Date: | 2011-01-25 15:26:28 |
Message-ID: | 201101251526.p0PFQSt20748@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > That is an interesting case. I didn't mention "module" here because
> > above this ia a dblink() function call, and we are referencing the
> > function call in the text. I couldn't figure out how to mention
> > "module" here without making the text more complex. I thought of:
>
> > The <link linkend="CONTRIB-DBLINK">dblink</> function (part of the
> > dblink module) executes a remote query.
>
> > but that seems awkward. Ideas?
>
> That's not just awkward, but flat wrong, because the link points to
> documentation of the module not the function. Correct would be
> something like
>
> The <function>dblink()</> function (part of the
> <link linkend="CONTRIB-DBLINK">dblink</> module) executes a remote query.
The tag for the dblink module is:
<sect1 id="dblink">
the function's tag is:
<refentry id="CONTRIB-DBLINK">
so I believe the text in the patch is correct. (Yes, I realize those
are confusing tags.)
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-01-25 15:43:32 | Re: Doc reference of contrib modules |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-01-25 15:17:06 | Re: Doc reference of contrib modules |