On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 1:19 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandboss...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 04:04:03PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > > Looking at this again, how happy are you with the way you've got > > several roles per <varlistentry> instead of one for each? I realize > > that was probably part of the intent of the change, to move the data > > from below the table into the table, and I see the merit of that. But > > one of your other complaints was the entries in the table were > > unordered, and it's hard for them to really be ordered if you have > > groups like this, since you can't alphabetize, for example, unless you > > have just a single entry per <varlistentry>. > > Yeah, my options were to either separate the roles or to weaken the > ordering, and I guess I felt like the weaker ordering was slightly less > bad. The extra context in some of the groups seemed worth keeping, and > this probably isn't the only page of our docs that might require ctrl+f. > But I'll yield to the majority opinion here. > > There are few enough that logical grouping instead of strict alphabetical makes sense. v4 WFM David J.
