Re: Gtk patch version 3, part 1

[Jan D.]

> 
> + @cindex GTK customize, @file{~/.gtkrc-2.0} file
> 
> This is too long for an index entry.  Also, they
> don't belong in the same entry.  They should be two entries.

Okay, I just copied the layout from these index entries at the top of the
file:
@cindex X resources, @file{~/.Xdefaults} file
@cindex X resources, @file{~/.Xresources} file

> 
>   See documents at
> + @uref{http://www.gtk.org/} for that.
> 
> It is not good to refer to a web site for documentation purposes.
> Please refer to something that can be included in the user's machine.

Do you mean "that the user can include into his machine" or "something
that might be on the users machine already"?

If the second, can I refer to /usr/share/gtk-doc, where the GTK
documentation is usually installed?

>     +   Note that this is only for customizing specific GTK widget features.
>     + To customize Emacs font, background, faces e.t.c., use the normal
>     + X Resources, see @ref{Resources}.
> 
> To make this useful, it is important to be at least a little more
> specific about which aspects to customize through GTK and which
> through X resources.  If you can do this clearly with a description,
> that is fine; otherwise you could use a list.

It is given by the GTK documentation, is it OK to just refer to that?

> The word "resources" is an ordinary noun, so don't capitailze it.
> It should be "etc.", not "e.t.c."

Changed.

> 
> +   For dialogs a GtkDialog is used.
> 
> Please avoid the passive voice, here and everywhere, unless
> it is absolutely necessary.

How about

  Dialogs in Emacs are GtkDialog widgets.

>     + @example
>     + widget_class "GtkWindow.GtkVBox.GtkFixed.GtkVScrollbar" style "my_style"
>     + @end example
> 
> That line is very long.  It might work ok if you use @smallexample
> instead of @example.  Please do that for all the examples in the
> section; inconsistency looks bad.
> 
> Can this be written as two lines?

It must be one line in the ~/.gtkrc-2.0 file, so I would like to avoid
changing it.

> +   So the two full paths above are in Emacs the same as:
> 
> That's not very clear language.  How about
> 
>     Thus, for Emacs you can write the two examples above as:
> 
> if that is what you mean.

Yes it is, thanks.

        Jan D.