some new glossary entries

I wrote glossary entries for some terms I wanted to look up there but
didn't find: "restartpoint" and "LSN". I put this together based on
existing text. "LSN" was already in the acronyms list but I think it's
more appropriate in the glossary, so I moved things around a bit.

> On 2 May 2023, at 09:05, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
> I wrote glossary entries for some terms I wanted to look up there but didn't find: "restartpoint" and "LSN". I put this together based on existing text. "LSN" was already in the acronyms list but I think it's more appropriate in the glossary, so I moved things around a bit.

+1 LGTM.

+ <glossentry id="glossary-lsn">
+ <glossterm>LSN</glossterm>
+ <glosssee otherterm="glossary-log-sequence-number"/>
+ </glossentry>

The other <glosssee otherterm="foo" /> entries doesn't have a glossentry id
attribute set, is the use here related to the glossentry.show.acronym param?

--
Daniel Gustafsson

On 2023-May-02, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:

> + <glossentry id="glossary-lsn">
> + <glossterm>LSN</glossterm>
> + <glosssee otherterm="glossary-log-sequence-number"/>
> + </glossentry>
>
> The other <glosssee otherterm="foo" /> entries doesn't have a glossentry id
> attribute set, is the use here related to the glossentry.show.acronym param?

I debated with myself for 347d2b07fcc2 on whether to add id attribs to
<glosssee> entries. The only saving grace for doing that is that you
can link to such entries; but if you do that, you're only causing the
user one more click in order to see the definition they want to see. So
in the end I decided not make the glosssee's directly referenceable.
And I think this new entry shouldn't have an id either.

I think that what glossentry.show.acronym allows is to show the
<acronym> text that's part of the main entry:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28869578/docbook-5-rendering-without-abbrev-tag/28879785#28879785
so the fact that there's an id in the other entry doesn't change
anything.

If we do turn glossentry.show.acronym on (and I don't see any reason not
to), we can follow up later to add <acronym> and <abbrev> tags to other
entries, too.

--
Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"I'm always right, but sometimes I'm more right than other times."
(Linus Torvalds)
https://lore.kernel.org/git/Pine(dot)LNX(dot)4(dot)58(dot)0504150753440(dot)7211(at)ppc970(dot)osdl(dot)org/

> On 2 May 2023, at 12:24, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
>
> On 2023-May-02, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
>> + <glossentry id="glossary-lsn">
>> + <glossterm>LSN</glossterm>
>> + <glosssee otherterm="glossary-log-sequence-number"/>
>> + </glossentry>
>>
>> The other <glosssee otherterm="foo" /> entries doesn't have a glossentry id
>> attribute set, is the use here related to the glossentry.show.acronym param?
>
> I debated with myself for 347d2b07fcc2 on whether to add id attribs to
> <glosssee> entries. The only saving grace for doing that is that you
> can link to such entries; but if you do that, you're only causing the
> user one more click in order to see the definition they want to see. So
> in the end I decided not make the glosssee's directly referenceable.
> And I think this new entry shouldn't have an id either.

Agreed, that makes sense.

> I think that what glossentry.show.acronym allows is to show the
> <acronym> text that's part of the main entry:
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28869578/docbook-5-rendering-without-abbrev-tag/28879785#28879785
> so the fact that there's an id in the other entry doesn't change
> anything.
>
> If we do turn glossentry.show.acronym on (and I don't see any reason not
> to), we can follow up later to add <acronym> and <abbrev> tags to other
> entries, too.

+1

--
Daniel Gustafsson

On 02.05.23 12:55, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> On 2 May 2023, at 12:24, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
>>
>> On 2023-May-02, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>
>>> + <glossentry id="glossary-lsn">
>>> + <glossterm>LSN</glossterm>
>>> + <glosssee otherterm="glossary-log-sequence-number"/>
>>> + </glossentry>
>>>
>>> The other <glosssee otherterm="foo" /> entries doesn't have a glossentry id
>>> attribute set, is the use here related to the glossentry.show.acronym param?
>>
>> I debated with myself for 347d2b07fcc2 on whether to add id attribs to
>> <glosssee> entries. The only saving grace for doing that is that you
>> can link to such entries; but if you do that, you're only causing the
>> user one more click in order to see the definition they want to see. So
>> in the end I decided not make the glosssee's directly referenceable.
>> And I think this new entry shouldn't have an id either.
>
> Agreed, that makes sense.
>
>> I think that what glossentry.show.acronym allows is to show the
>> <acronym> text that's part of the main entry:
>> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28869578/docbook-5-rendering-without-abbrev-tag/28879785#28879785
>> so the fact that there's an id in the other entry doesn't change
>> anything.
>>
>> If we do turn glossentry.show.acronym on (and I don't see any reason not
>> to), we can follow up later to add <acronym> and <abbrev> tags to other
>> entries, too.
>
> +1

Committed with the recommended changes.