directory management language

[kcri...@gmail.com]

Subsection 5.6.2: Managing Directories 
https://pretextbook.org/doc/guide/html/processing-directory-management.html#processing-directory-management-4

does not seem quite in line (stylistically, not code) with respect to what to name the various asset folders in

Section N.2: Transferring files 
https://pretextbook.org/doc/guide/html/cli-transfer.html

and some other places like Section 5.2 on the CLI.

While I understand that Section 5.6 is about directory management more generally, perhaps that language should be brought into line with the generated_assets/assets language that the CLI uses, or at least to refer to it more directly.

I was unsure if this was a -dev or a -support question, but in any case I'm happy to implement (or at least open an issue) for whatever the best solution is deemed to be.

[Rob Beezer]

Maybe the CLI language should be brought into line with PreTeXt?

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "PreTeXt development" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
> to pretext-dev...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:pretext-dev...@googlegroups.com>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pretext-dev/8dc753c6-2f4a-48e9-870b-ef532ac49ed8n%40googlegroups.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pretext-dev/8dc753c6-2f4a-48e9-870b-ef532ac49ed8n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

[kcri...@gmail.com]

Maybe, but I think a lot of people are now using `generated_assets` etc. ... of course, a minimally invasive option would be to just add a "note" or something in Subsection 5.6.2 saying "the convention if you use the CLI is as follows, but for simplicity we will continue to use this convention".  After all, there isn't really a difference, it's just the naming conventions which a lot of authors will doubtless follow (or have provided by the CLI).