Message305062
| Author | toonarmycaptain |
|---|---|
| Recipients | benjamin.peterson, docs@python, ezio.melotti, lemburg, martin.panter, r.david.murray, serhiy.storchaka, toonarmycaptain, vstinner |
| Date | 2017-10-26.14:59:10 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1509029950.19.0.213398074469.issue31873@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
Does the Unicode documentation currently conform to that convention, or does it require editing? It appears to me that a lot of cases where reference to "Unicode object" is currently capitalised (most of them, in fact) may need to be modified. However, it would seem that there is a grey area in making a distinction between reference to the unicode type as implemented in Python and reference to the standard as a descriptor of the format of an object? The way I read there a lot of the cases are in essence a reference to both. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2017-10-26 14:59:10 | toonarmycaptain | set | recipients: + toonarmycaptain, lemburg, vstinner, benjamin.peterson, ezio.melotti, r.david.murray, docs@python, martin.panter, serhiy.storchaka |
| 2017-10-26 14:59:10 | toonarmycaptain | set | messageid: <1509029950.19.0.213398074469.issue31873@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2017-10-26 14:59:10 | toonarmycaptain | link | issue31873 messages |
| 2017-10-26 14:59:10 | toonarmycaptain | create | |