Joel de Guzman wrote:
I still don't understand why there needs to be a difference between the L&F of the "standalone" documentation and the "web" based documentation. Is there a rationale?
It's consistency for the plain reason of reducing the jarring visual context switches a visitor would go through when reading through the web site. Just think of all the design flips one goes through when reading the current web site.
If we are going for uniformity, then we should definitely strive for a common L&F for both the "standalone" and "web" docs.
I don't think there's an overwhelming reason to make offline and online docs look exactly the same. They are specifically design for different uses so what is good in one may not be good in the other.
I'd say there are lots of good designs found in Rene's rendition but it's too big a departure from the BoostBook L&F that we have worked hard on to reach it's current form. Sure, it's not perfect, but it's the result of endless discussion on this list and the boost list as well.
Exactly :-) Which is why I didn't want to change the offline L&F. And why I tried to keep the basic elements of the L&F in the online L&F of the docs.
While I welcome improvement tweaks here and there, I'd be sad if we'll just throw away the work done so far.
I should say that it's not my intent to throw away work on the online L&F either. So if there's some style that I missed to incorporate from the BoostBook L&F to the online equivalent please point it out.
--grafik ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Boost-docs mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe and other administrative requests: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs
