On 5 December 2017 at 20:34, Dustin Ingram <di@di.codes> wrote: > Ah, I see, by "other two" I thought you meant the other two new fields. > > Looking at https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0566/ might make it > more clear that I originally intended the "New in Version 1.3" and > "Changed in Version 1.3" headings to only be under the "Fields" > heading, so the outline would be: > > * Abstract > * Fields > - New in Version 1.3 > * Description-Content-Type (optional) > * Provides-Extra (optional, multiple use) > - Changed in Version 1.3 > * Name > * Version Specifiers > * Environment markers > * JSON-compatible Metadata > * Summary of Differences From PEP 345 > * References > * Copyright > * Acknowledgements > > However I could see the value in inverting this a bit to be: > > * Abstract > * New in Version 1.3 > - Fields > * Description-Content-Type (optional) > * Provides-Extra (optional, multiple use) > * Changed in Version 1.3 > - Fields > * Name > - Version Specifiers > - Environment markers > - JSON-compatible Metadata > * Summary of Differences From PEP 345 > * References > * Copyright > * Acknowledgements > > If this is preferable.
Oh! Sorry, I follow now. I'd misunderstood the structure completely - my mistake. I was thinking of "Version Specifiers" and "Environment Markers" as fields, when they aren't - they are *part* of certain fields. The table of contents is completely clear, though, it's just that I wasn't concentrating so much when I read that. I'd say it's fine as it stands. Thanks for clarifying. Paul _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig