Expanding the Glossary #2443
Merged
Expanding the Glossary #2443
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
@Kevin-OConnor I did make a few changes to ZTR figured I should tag you but it is really just correcting an abbreviation that was wrong. PH->PDH |
|
Seems like a good place to fix #2388 |
|
I like all the entries except EPA and OPR. Those seem to be getting too far away from the purpose of frc-docs |
|
Fixes #2388 I think EPA and OPR are used often enough in the FRC context to warrant inclusion. I am not going to die on this hill however so am interested in what others think. |
sciencewhiz
approved these changes
Dec 28, 2023
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Based on numerous CD threads there are a lot of acronyms used. Wanted to expand this glossary to include them.
Thoughts on abbreviation structure? We could instead list the term and then include the abbreviation in the description.
Do you think all of this should go into the glossary? I have heard arguments about breaking it up. To me a glossary is not really something you read it is instead something that is searched for to answer a specific need. In this case the size is irrelevant but the completion only becomes more helpful with more entries.