Command-line option jomdoc render -f is not intuitive

[clange]

It's not intuitive that the command line option jomdoc render -f (f = file?) is the same as --ntn. How about using -n instead?

[dmisev]

I think the best would be --f, so that it's same as the others and to the shortcuts used in the MKM paper.

[dmisev]

@Christoph, Christine - forgot, please tell me what would you like:

1. drop -f, --ntn and put only --f, or
2. change -f with -n

[clange]

Replying to dmisev:

@Christoph, Christine - forgot, please tell me what would you like: 1. drop -f, --ntn and put only --f, or 2. change -f with -n

I think you're right that "n" is inconsistent with the paper. However, I'd like to suggest a different solution. Those names from the paper are abbreviations anyway, so why not create full "long" options for each of them, at least as alternatives? That will make shell scripts and make files using JOMDoc more self-explanatory, because one still doesn't understand those "short" "long" options like --ec without memorizing the paper.

• -f, --file
• -D, --doc, --document (I took -D because it conflicts with --dynamic)
• -c, --cd, --content-dictionary
• -e, --ec, --extensional-context
• -g, --gc, --global-context
• -i, --ic, --intensional-context
• -m, --md, --metadata
• -C, --ccf, --cascading-context

[nmueller]

Any decisions on that so far?

[dmisev]

Well it doesn't depend on me, it's not a problem to change the options. But Christine hasn't replied about her preferences, and I don't know if she already integrated the client.

[nmueller]

Well, Tine just arrived at New Zealand so I guess she first needs some time to acclimatize herself ;-)

But that's fine, so now I know the status of this ticket.

Thanks, Dimitar!

[cmueller]

Hey, I already integrated and use the client in panta rhei. I thought I let you know, sorry for this.

What do you need to know? Should I specify how I use/ call the client, in particular, which options I need? Or what do you mean with preferences.

[dmisev]

I was talking about the options Christoph suggested above. But it's ok, I realized just now that those are actually a superset of the ones which are currently in the client, so I'll just add the missing shortcuts, and it will stay backwards compatible.