Re: GDP: NR 1.7 Editorial second draft

[Graham Percival]

On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 12:03:04 +0100
"Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> wrote:

> Graham Percival wrote> On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 00:12:45 +0100
> > IIRC we discussed standardizing the name of these, and IIRC we
> > chose "macros".  If so, I'd better change @predefined to print
> > "Predefined macros" intead of "... commands".
> > I definitely think we should standardize on one term, and
> > @predefined should match what's in LM 4.
> 
> I'm pretty sure we chose the standard term "predefined commands" 
> where we meant predefined commands with the meaning above.

Hmm... actually, on second thought, I think I was discussing
"variables" (instead of "macros" or "identifies" or the like).
And it might have been with Han-Wen instead of you.

> I'd have to dig out our mails on my old PC to check.  If I find 
> anything different I'll let you know.  ("macros" is too computer-ese
> for many users) 

Nah, don't bother.

> I don't think we discussed standardising on "built-in commands" for
> the alternative, but it might be a good idea.  Should we also list
> these under that as a heading?  At the moment we've just
> discarded them if we found them listed under Predefined commands.

No, let's not list them.  They're included in the funindex; that's
enough.  The point of @predefined is to direct attention towards
tweakability.

Cheers,
- Graham