Re: [patch] console_codes.4: ffix

[nick black]

Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) left as an exercise for the reader:
> As I understand it, it's there because CSI is not a CSI-prefixed sequence
> (i.e., you have to first document CSI itself, and then in a different list
> you can document sequences prefixed by CSI).
> So I'd say it belongs there.

except this is literally in the table named "ESC- but not
CSI-sequences". and it's not, by itself, a sequence. and it's
detailed in the "ECMA-48 CSI Sequences" section below.

so it is documented, near where it's relevant. IMHO.

if we're going to keep it, we ought add OSC to this section by
the same reasoning. i can do that and send a fresh patch, or you
can do it to my patch, or we can do with what i have.

> Maybe it should go into a separate subsection called "Operating system
> commands"?

well, there are only these few, and they are "ESC- but not CSI
sequences". i don't honestly think the average reader cares
whether something is a CSI or an OSC or linux-specific control
sequence, especially since there's really no user-relevant
reason as to why one is in any given group. but i can go ahead
and break this section out if you'd like.

put another way, some people might read the man page wanting to
know "how do i change a color". i can't imagine anyone ever
wanting to know "what are the various OSC-prefixed commands?"
that said, i'm happy to introduce the substructure if it gets
the formatting fixed =].

-- 
nick black -=- https://www.nick-black.com
to make an apple pie from scratch,
you need first invent a universe.