Re: [Ethereal-dev] Reviewed and updated "User's Guide" available

[Graeme Hewson <ghewson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ulf Lamping wrote:

> > 7.4 first paragraph and 7.4.4: I would say "lookups" rather than
> > "resolvings".
>
>
> changed at two places, please review

7.4 I would say (this is split between language and style) "This 
conversion might fail. For example, the name might be unknown. Some of 
the lookups are done with data from your local machine, while others ask 
network services such as DNS."

> > 8.4.1 missing text "Note!" next to icon
>
>
> There are also some other places in the document, where I've choosen to 
> use some small descriptive text rather than the "Note!" text.
> I think this is more helpful. What do you think?

Sorry, I don't see the difference between this note and other notes. You 
might consider dropping the Note!, Tip! and perhaps Warning! text 
altogether.

> > 9.4.1 note: could you use an em dash (in ASCII: --) instead of the
> > hyphen in "not - disabling"?
>
>
> do you know, how to encode this in docbook XML, as I don't know it :-(

Well, some googling suggests "—" would work if the DTD supports it.


> > C.3 "SAA like user interface"  Good grief, is IBM still plugging SAA?!
> > :-)  Seriously, I'm not sure many people will have even heard of it!
>
>
> Hmmm, do you have a better example/name for this?

Just "GUI", I think.  Let's see...

"Tethereal is a terminal oriented version of Ethereal designed for 
capturing and displaying packets when a graphical environment, or GUI, 
isn't necessary or available. It supports the same options as Ethereal. 
For more information on Tethereal, see the manual pages (man tethereal)."

> > C.7.3 3. "and tweak it"
>
>
> Sorry, don't get the point

You had "an" instead of "and", but corrected now.

> > D. Should we upgrade to Version 1.2 of the GFDL?
>
>
> As the Debian people have problems with the GFDL being not really free, 
> I'm thinking about changing the license, but don't know the right one.
>
> Of course this would require to ask all people contributing to the book, 
> which might also be hard work :-(

Ho hum.  I would have suggested looking at a Creative Commons licence, 
but they themselves point to the GFDL 
(http://creativecommons.org/faq#faq_entry_3647).  Whatever...