On 29 August 2010 22:36, Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote: > Thom Brown <[email protected]> writes: >> On 29 August 2010 22:21, Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote: >>> What your changes seem to >>> accomplish is to take the <simplelist> and <informaltable> constructs >>> outside any <para>, but what is the point of that? > >> Well, those can be in their own <para> container too, although I don't >> think that's an issue. > >> But I shalln't pursue it further if you think there's really no issue. > > Well, I don't know --- I'm no SGML expert, and I'm not sure whether > there's a preferred style for that. But I see in a quick grep that > every occurrence of <simplelist> in our docs, and all but a few > occurrences of <informaltable>, are within paras with some surrounding > text, in precisely the same style as here. So if this needs to be > changed then it needs to be changed in a lot of places. I'm disinclined > to mess with it unless there's a pretty concrete reason to do so.
Any opinion on the first patch I provided at the beginning of this thread? -- Thom Brown Twitter: @darkixion IRC (freenode): dark_ixion Registered Linux user: #516935 -- Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
