Eric Niebler wrote:
Joel de Guzman wrote:
I *heart* consistency. :-) But with which part of the rest of the doc
layout is the function description inconsistent? I'm not trying to be
difficult, it's a serious question. Dave's example was bogus, IMO -- an
apples to oranges comparison.
I've done a before and after to make this discussion a little less
abstract.
Tabularized function descriptions:
http://boost-sandbox.sf.net/libs/xpressive/doc/html/boost/xpressive/cpp_regex_traits.html
Definition list-ified function descriptions:
http://boost-sandbox.sf.net/libs/xpressive/doc/html/boost/xpressive/cpp_regex_traits2.html
(Sorry for the long URLs. TunyURL is down at the moment.)
Fact: with definition lists, less fits on the screen. And it's no easier
on my eyes, either, but that's subjective. Not even the C++ standard
uses definition list-style layout for function descriptions, FWIW.
The change to the XSLT is simple, so that's not a concern. The usability
of the docs is my #1 priority. So ... opinions on this? Let's hear 'em.
I still prefer the tabularized function descriptions, FWIW. I vote
for Tabularized. The definition list looks a bit cluttered. It looks
cluttered especially when there is just one parameter. It works ok
if there are more parameters though. But then again, the tabularized
function descriptions work well for multiple parameters too.
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
