Application and command names in <title> elements

[Marc Fonvieille]

On Mon, May 19, 2003 at 03:30:48PM -0400, Tom Rhodes wrote:
> 
> I'd like to chime in here if you do not mind.  While I was thinking
> about this just last night, a question arose as to which is more appropriate:
> <command> or manual page entities.
> 
> <command>, and &man.REF;, to me, are ambiguous.  For instance, we can wrap
> the following in either command or &man entities:
> 
> By using the &man.ssh.1; utility for remote network connections, you reduce
> the risk of password theft.
> 
> By using the <command>ssh</command> utility for remote network connections,
> you reduce the risk of password theft.
>

In this case the manual page entity seems a better choice:

- on the online version it let the reader to read the manual page via the
  link generated.
- on both online and printed versions, it gives an info about the manual
  page section

> Perhaps we should standardize this some way.  We have the screen for examples.
> Perhaps for commands where we do not need the screen tag, we can use the
> markup:
> 
> Use <command>cvsup -g -L 2 src</command> to remove the graphic dependency on
> X11.
> 
> Then we can use screen for, say, a series of commands which generate output.

I agree, <screen></screen> should be used for that and for multiple
lines commands.

> There seems to be mixed usage of the command and manual page entities.
[...]

When we have the choice between <command></command> and manual page for
a command name (just the name, not a command with parameters)
the manual page entity should be used.

Marc