timx_at_spamto.devnul.com said...
> >>>>> "Ed" == Ed Prochak <edprochak_at_adelphia.net> writes:
>
> Ed> D Newsham wrote:
>
> Ed> But actually I don't fault you. I dislike the syntax presentation
> Ed> in the Complete Reference (CR). The regular ORACLE documentation
> Ed> does it MUCH better.
>
> Ed> (uses connection arrows and such. Makes "OR" cases much more
> Ed> visible. In fact now that I say that, the CR could have done this
> Ed> better just by using multiple lines as:
>
> Ed> { VALUES (expresseion [,expression]...)
> Ed> | query...)
>
> Actually, I find the way syntax is expressed in the Oracle manuals
> extremely frustrating. The problem for me is they use little graphics
> to do this and I'm a blind user. My screen reading software can read
> text, but cannot interpret graphicccs. Most of the time, its OK
> because I can work it out from the examples. However, form time to
> time I end up spending ages working out the exact syntax and that can
> be very irritating.
>
> My point, apart from a moan, is two fold. Firstly, if I ever post a
> syntax question, I hope nobody jumps down my throat because of
> assumptions they are making about me and secondly, its good to
> remember what is clear, concise and obvious to one may not necessarily
> be to another and its not necessarily a reflection of ability etc.
>
> Tim
>
Well, Tim, even for those of us who can *see* the "railroad diagrams,"
they can be pretty confusing at times. Those diagrams are appropriate
for the person who has to write the syntax parser; but for the rest of
us, they can be as useful as listing all the vi commands without
explaining their use. :)
--
/Karsten
Received on Mon Feb 10 2003 - 11:00:04 CST
