[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference vaxuum::document_ft

Title:DOCUMENT T1.0
Notice:**New notesfile (DOCUMENT.NOTE) now available (see note 897)**
Moderator:CLOSET::ADLER
Created:Mon Feb 09 1987
Last Modified:Thu Oct 31 1991
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:897
Total number of notes:4397

272.0. "Local symbols ?" by PRSIS4::BURESI (Marc BURESI, @EVO, DTN 858-5395) Fri Apr 17 1987 14:31

    In BL6, it was possible to have "local" symbols: symbols known only
    within a book element.
    
    It doesn't seem possible anymore to have local symbols in FT1. Is
    it right ?
    
    I've used them for the following reason: I use repeatedly a paragraph
    which varies from chapter to chapter of just one word. I'd like to
    do (the syntax is FT's one, although I actually used BL6):
    
    <DEFINE_SYMBOL>(GLOBAL_SYMBOL\
                    foo ... <REFERENCE>(local_symbol) ... bla) 
    
    in my symbol definition file. Then in each chapter:
    
    <CHAPTER>(CHAPx)
    
    <DEFINE_SYMBOL>(LOCAL_SYMBOL\mumble)
    <REFERENCE>(global_symbol)
    
    Is it still doable ?
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
272.1Synonyms and universal tags, expanding a bitCOOKIE::JOHNSTONFri Apr 17 1987 14:5542
Seems to me there's another note floating around here asking for this 
capability, referred to as "synonyms".  In fact, now that I think about 
it, I started a note on it cuz I wanted to define symbols for oft-used
math formulas.  I ran into another case today; I wanted to do something
like <DEFINE_SYMBOL>(uwidget\<mcs>(micro)widget), where uwidget is a
product code name that appears often in our specs and that will
eventually change. 

I think the answer was "no can do".

Here's one for the wishlist, digressing just a bit.  Because the micro 
symbol is universal to the industry, how about a tag like <u> or <mu> to
replace <mcs>(micro)?

Along the same lines, how about a <TM> tag instead of 
<special_char>(trademark)?  Not only is DEC increasingly concerned about 
properly identifying internal and external products, I bet the 
issue is widespread in the industry.  I know that our standards 
do not encourage identifying competitor products (opt for generic names 
like photocopy instead of Xerox(tm) ).  But sometimes it just ain't 
possible.  Take a document that describes benchmarks for a particular 
kind of product; the benchmarks may not be meaningful without 
explicitly naming the competition. 

I don't think that the DOCUMENT developers should be in the business of 
monitoring standards and making it easy for everyone to adhere to every 
standard, especially those that are only internal.  But if we are aware 
that customers face the same kinds of issues, I think that those
particular cases warrant investigation.  Does this make sense to anyone 
else?

Please don't lose sight that .0 raised one issue, and that this note 
expanded on it raising another:

1.  Tag synonym/redefinition capabilities using <define_symbol>.

2.  Adding tags that are universal, such as <mu> and <tm>.



Rose

272.2Conditions can replace local symbols.PRSIS4::BURESIMarc BURESI, @EVO, DTN 858-5395Mon Apr 20 1987 13:4613
    Thanks.
    
    After thinking further about .0, one way to do it is by the use
    of conditions: the global symbol def. file could parametrize the
    symbol definition by testing predefined conditions (one for each
    book element).
    
    Each book element just have to set the appropriate condition before
    referencing the symbol.
    
    Just in case somebody is interested,
    
    Marc.