Обсуждение: Duplicate paragraph
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/13/sql-syntax-lexical.html Description: Greetings I was going through the documentation of the SQL Language that you have provided and there is a possible duplicate paragraph that I noticed in section 4.1 - Lexical Syntax (https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sql-syntax-lexical.html). In section 4.1.1 (Identifiers and Key Words), there is a paragraph explaining a variant of quoted identifier that allows Unicode characters. All content in the paragraph, right up to the end of section 4.1.1, is almost copied word-by-word in section 4.1.2.3 - String Constants With Unicode Escapes. I wasn't able to judge if this was intentional or not, so I ended up writing this.
On Monday, May 24, 2021, PG Doc comments form <noreply@postgresql.org> wrote:
Right up to the end of section 4.1.1, is
almost copied word-by-word in section 4.1.2.3 - String Constants With
Unicode Escapes.
They are two different things, as evidenced by there being two different sections with different section headings, that use the same fundamental writing rules.
David J.
On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 09:35:49PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote: > On Monday, May 24, 2021, PG Doc comments form <noreply@postgresql.org> wrote: > > Right up to the end of section 4.1.1, is > almost copied word-by-word in section 4.1.2.3 - String Constants With > Unicode Escapes. > > > > They are two different things, as evidenced by there being two different > sections with different section headings, that use the same fundamental writing > rules. We have gotten reports about this perceived duplication before --- not sure how we can improve things. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.
On Tuesday, May 25, 2021, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 09:35:49PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Monday, May 24, 2021, PG Doc comments form <noreply@postgresql.org> wrote:
>
> Right up to the end of section 4.1.1, is
> almost copied word-by-word in section 4.1.2.3 - String Constants With
> Unicode Escapes.
>
>
>
> They are two different things, as evidenced by there being two different
> sections with different section headings, that use the same fundamental writing
> rules.
We have gotten reports about this perceived duplication before --- not
sure how we can improve things.
Two this year but none the previous 4 sound about right? I’m up to the challenge of fixing it if avoiding this type of report is the goal.
David J.
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 09:35:49PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
>> They are two different things, as evidenced by there being two different
>> sections with different section headings, that use the same fundamental writing
>> rules.
> We have gotten reports about this perceived duplication before --- not
> sure how we can improve things.
Yeah, I was just thinking the same. The rules *are* largely the same,
by design, so the text is necessarily going to be pretty similar.
But merging these sections doesn't sound like an improvement.
One thing we could easily do is not use isomorphic examples in the two
sections. For example, instead of illustrating how to spell "data" in
both forms, use "name" as the example for the identifier case.
regards, tom lane
On Tuesday, May 25, 2021, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 09:35:49PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
>> They are two different things, as evidenced by there being two different
>> sections with different section headings, that use the same fundamental writing
>> rules.
> We have gotten reports about this perceived duplication before --- not
> sure how we can improve things.
Yeah, I was just thinking the same. The rules *are* largely the same,
by design, so the text is necessarily going to be pretty similar.
But merging these sections doesn't sound like an improvement.
Agrreed.
One thing we could easily do is not use isomorphic examples in the two
sections. For example, instead of illustrating how to spell "data" in
both forms, use "name" as the example for the identifier case.
+1. This is the kind change I expected to find once I started looking for specifics.
David J.