Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> On 09.01.23 21:08, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Doc: add XML ID attributes to <sectN> and <varlistentry> tags.
> Any reason the new ids in create_database.sgml deviate from the normal
> naming schemes used everywhere else? Is it to preserve the existing
> create-database-strategy? Maybe we should rename that one and make the
> new ones consistent?
You'd have to ask Brar that, I didn't question his choices too much.
I have no objection to changing things as you suggest. I'm hesitant to
rename very many pre-existing IDs for fear of breaking peoples' bookmarks,
but changing create-database-strategy doesn't seem like a big deal.
That reminds me that I was going to suggest fixing the few existing
variances from the "use '-' not '_'" policy:
$ grep 'id="[a-zA-Z0-9-]*_' *sgml ref/*sgml
config.sgml: <varlistentry id="guc-plan-cache_mode"
xreflabel="plan_cache_mode">
libpq.sgml: <varlistentry id="libpq-PQpingParams-PQPING_OK">
libpq.sgml: <varlistentry id="libpq-PQpingParams-PQPING_REJECT">
libpq.sgml: <varlistentry id="libpq-PQpingParams-PQPING_NO_RESPONSE">
libpq.sgml: <varlistentry id="libpq-PQpingParams-PQPING_NO_ATTEMPT">
pgbuffercache.sgml: <table id="pgbuffercache_summary-columns">
ref/pg_checksums.sgml: <refsect1 id="r1-app-pg_checksums-1">
As you say, this isn't required by the toolchain any longer, but it
seems like a good idea to have consistent tag spelling. I'm particularly
annoyed by guc-plan-cache_mode, which isn't even consistent with itself
let alone every other guc-XXX tag.
regards, tom lane
