[Typo3-doc] question about the glossary

[Karsten Dambekalns]

Hi.

On 2004-11-27, Andrew Henson <andy at elaptics.co.uk> wrote:
>> can for the glossary but I think that there is no need to have "plugin" 
>> defined because it is the same as extension and I have already added 
>> plugin to the extension related terms.
>> 
> Actually after further thought plugin may be a bad example - it may be 
> worth having this as a separate item, however there are a number of 

Right, an extension doesn not need to provide plugins :) So there *is*
a difference.

> others which could be removed or perhaps combined so there is one 
> definition with all similar terms listed.

Well. Those words might be similar, but they should still be listed -
to make it possiblt to 'enter' the glossary at different points. This
has been discussed before, as soon as the content is in some sort of
extension this will be easier.

For now, it might be good to leave those entries in, but one could add
'see ...' references where applicable and maybe add a note that this
item is 'complete because almost synonym to...'.

> Also, I have noticed that there are a a lot of words to be defined which 
> are TypoScript "key words" such as userFunc but there are more which are 
> not listed, e.g. dayofweek, dayofmonth?  Should we be defining these 
> terms in the glossary when definitions are available in the TSRef 
> documents already?

I guess those are in the glossary because they appear frequently in
documentation, newsgroups, and more. They are core concepts, central
parts of the TYPO3 universe, and as such have their place in the
glossary.

0.02,
Karsten