Eric Niebler wrote:
I posted a mock-up, people expressed support, I implemented it in XSLT.
I'll change it when I feel there's consensus that it should be changed.
I'll also point out that these are definition lists, *not* arbitrarily
deep hierarchies. And there is nothing inconsistent or non-traditional
about using a table to lay out definition lists. Our FOP/PDF generators
do just that.
Awaiting comments from others.
Joao(IIRC) and I expressed support for it. I think it looks nice.
However, Dave does have a point. And his point is about consistency.
You showed me how consistency with the boxes (code, tables, TOCs,
blurbs), however different they may be in terms of function, can
improve the docs. And it did, significantly! Perhaps this applies
here too? That said, I'm not so sure I like Rene's layout either, so
I'm half-half. Maybe you can cook a variation of your scheme that
is more consistent with the rest of the doc layout?
Regards,
--
Joel de Guzman
http://www.boost-consulting.com
http://spirit.sf.net
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Boost-docs mailing list
[email protected]
Unsubscribe and other administrative requests:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs
