On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 16:16:24 +0000, Peter Relson wrote: >Gil asked if the location linked to by Shmuel is the right place for the doc >about the case of no PARM. > > ... We don't want the information in multiple places, > Usually I agree rather strongly with that principle. It makes maintenance of the document more robust with less effort and spares the user the chore of reading multiple very similar descriptions, looking for minute differences. However ...
> and the linkage conventions section is a good place for it to land. > There's a joke that says, "A bore is a person who, if asked 'what time is it?' would start telling you how to build a clock!" For programmers who want only to know what is the effect on their programs when PARM= is omitted, Shmuel gave the right answer, "empty string". Such people don't care about "linkage conventions" or the construction of clocks. The Services Guide says, "If the PARM field was omitted in the EXEC statement, the count is set to zero." If it further added the phrase, "as if PARM=''" had been coded," I'd have to agree (grudgingly) the right information for the target audience was provided, but in the wrong place. It belongs in the JCL Ref. As for the RCF on function as opposed to content, the hyperlink (anchor) on the HTML page works for me, as I suspect it does for you. Can you use the hyperlink in the PDF document? For me, it gives ""HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request". Does it work for anyone, with any viewer? If so, it's an SR for my viewer(s). If not, it's an RCF for Tech Dcs. -- Thanks for your investigation, gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
