On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 16:35 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote: > On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 10:09 -0500, Jonathon Jongsma wrote: > [snip] > > So the downside is that all existing links will break. The upside is > > that this will never happen again in the future. I think that's a > > worthwhile tradeoff, but I thought I would ask for input. Any > > objections? > > That's fine with me, and I'd be very happy to have normal file names and > anchor names. > > Have you found a way to do this without manually specifying all the IDs?
Since we'd be breaking documentation links anyway, what do you think about simplifying the url structure a bit as well? I've wished for a long time that the documentation url was something I could easily remember, but it's really long and has repeating names, etc. For example, the proposed link I gave earlier: http://gtkmm.org/docs/gtkmm-2.4/docs/tutorial/html/chapter-memory.html that url has two 'docs' directories in it. it has a completely unnecessary 'html' folder, and the gtkmm-2.4 folder seems unnecessary as well. I understand why the structure is like this (it mirrors the source directories in the gtkmm tree), but it still seems like it could be presented better when published to the web. It would be really nice if this were just http://gtkmm.org/tutorial/chapter-memory.html or at the very most: http://gtkmm.org/docs/tutorial/chapter-memory.html comments? -- Jonner _______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
