David Abrahams wrote:
Rene Rivera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I don't see a contextual difference. It all ends up in a browser
window, doesn't it?
Yes, although the offline use is more likely to also get printed out.
They are likely to get used differently. There's been mention from some
that they mostly use the docs in a scanning mode, while others tend to
sit and read carefully. I think that the former is more likely a use of
the online docs, and the latter of the offline docs. But more explicitly
the offline docs won't have all the navigation and interactive (i.e. the
webnotes) hence they can be tailored without the worry that they will
clash with those elements to make for the easiest to read. While the
online docs might be tailored for scanning and searching.
IMO that's the distinction between HTML and PDF. We shouldn't be
generating two different HTML L&Fs.
Good point. The unfortunate part is that much of the current docs are
not available in the PDFs. So we might be forced to accommodate printing
the HTML anyway.
Of course if we had a group of volunteers to translate all the
documentation to QuickBook or BoostBook, as I did for the bjam docs,
then it would alter the landscape :-)
--
-- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com
-- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com
-- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - grafikrobot/yahoo
-------------------------------------------------------
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
