Pacho Ramos wrote: > > So, rephrasing the example Alexandre pasted, consider: > > > > x11-libs/qt-core - The Qt toolkit is a comprehensive C++ application > > development framework. > > > > vs. > > > > x11-libs/qt-core - A comprehensive C++ application development framework > > > > Which one is better, in your opinion? > > Well, I my case I would prefer second
I agree, I also like the second example. > sentence... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentence_(linguistics)#Major_and_minor_sentences Suggests that even a phrase such as the second example above can be called a (minor) sentence. > but it would still end with a dot. I think that looks ugly and is redundant. Especially if we were to require that all DESCRIPTION phrases must always be presented with a full stop, I think it is a very bad idea to enforce that they are written into the ebuilds. Especially if there is a rule that they will always be terminated by a full stop then that should and must be added by tools using the ebuild. It makes absolutely no sense to have so frequent redundant data in ebuilds, and it seems like full stop or no full stop is a matter of presentation policy and should thus happen during presentation. > But if it sounds rare for you, no problem. ebuilds are markup and not formatting IMO, and the two shouldn't be confused. If you want to work on presentation (which is important too!) then go for it, but in any case I don't think a full stop at end of descriptions is really worth the cost. All user interfaces are shitty enough already, and users are unable to deal with information already, so please don't add redundancy like full stops would be to the problem. //Peter
pgpJU4HyNX5kN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
