On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 4:45 PM Amit Kapila <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 10:43 AM Peter Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 2:53 PM Amit Kapila <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 4:46 PM Chao Li <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 13, 2025, at 13:17, Peter Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > While reviewing the recent patches for SEQUENCE documentation I found > > > > > [1] a few more instances where the <structfield> tag should have been > > > > > used for some of the sequence fields (per the recent push [2]). > > > > > > > > > > > > > Good catch. LGTM. I rendered the html pages and viewed them, the pages > > > > also look good. > > > > > > > > > > Why do we think using <structfield> tag is appropriate instead of the > > > current <literal> tag? The explanation of the is_called says: "Sets > > > the sequence object's current value, and optionally its is_called > > > flag.", so from "object's current value", are we deducing it is the > > > same as struct? Ideally, it should be used to mark up the name of a > > > field in a struct which is close to what we are doing here. Do we have > > > a similar usage at other places in the docs? > > > > > > > As referenced in the first post above, Bruce had recommended/pushed > > [1] that the appropriate SGML tags to use for tables and columns are > > <structname> and <structfield>. > > > > So, I chose <structfield> because those fields ('last_value' and > > 'is_called') are columns of the sequence relation [2]. > > > > Okay, thanks for the context. I'll push your patch on Monday unless > there are any comments. >
Pushed. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
