My $0.02: 1) IMO it is not numbering which makes navigation easier, rather the table of contents - which is orthogonal issue :) I think that all longish pages should have the table, e.g. roadmap [2] lacks it. Numbering is convenient for referencing or citing, which is important for normative docs like specifications. E.g. I personally don't care if awt guide [3] has numbering or not, as long as it is well structured and easy to browse. 2) From maintenance POV, it would be nice to provide automated numbering rather than hardcode the digits as a part of contents. Bad example here is roadmap [2], which is inconstant by nature and painful to keep consistent by hand. So I'd prefer to not add hardcoded numbering until really needed.
-- Thanks, Alexey 2007/3/14, Konovalova, Svetlana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Dear all, I've noticed that certain [1]&[2] pages have numerated sections, and certain [3]&[4] don't. IMHO, section numeration makes navigation easier. For the sake of convenience, you can just say "see section 2.5" instead of saying the section name that is probably too long. I'd like to ask you whether we need section numeration within pages, or not. Could we get rid of this site inconsistency somehow? I'd like to, but I do not insist. :) What's your opinion? If you do not mind, I volunteer to fix this inconsistency. Feel free to express your ideas! Your feedback is very welcome! [1] http://harmony.apache.org/subcomponents/drlvm/developers_guide.html [2] http://harmony.apache.org/roadmap.html [3] http://harmony.apache.org/subcomponents/classlibrary/awt.html [4] http://harmony.apache.org/subcomponents/drlvm/JVMTI-PopFrame.html Thanks, Sveta
