Refactor glossary: clarifications, new section and more consistent markup #1535
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
parulin
force-pushed
the
refactor-glossary
branch
from
b86210c to
1be889c
Compare
I tried to clarify some sentences or correct some minor inaccuracies.
parulin
changed the title
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR is trying to clarify the glossary by using the field markup for recurring fields like "Previously known as". Some examples are provided.
Some inaccuracies are corrected and some sentences are reorganized to try to make more sense.
A new section "Confusions between qube types" is trying to provide another way to understand the terminology.