Re: module links at /docs-2.0/mod/index.xml

[André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>]

* Tim Gerundt wrote:

> I have a little suggestion for "/docs-2.0/mod/index.xml".
> In the documentation you use this "red" links for module links.
> I think at the module overview you should use this style, too.

folks, just wanna say, that Tim and me have already discussed that before. 
I suggested him to ask on the list.

My opinion is to stick with the current variant, because I think the red 
highlighting breaks the flow a bit - but I'm unsure.
Would be nice, if someone could say something; it would only be a small 
patch.

nd
-- 
Real programmers confuse Christmas and Halloween because
DEC 25 = OCT 31.  -- Unknown

                                      (found in ssl_engine_mutex.c)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org

Re: module links at /docs-2.0/mod/index.xml

[Astrid Kessler <ke...@kess-net.de>]

Erik Abele <er...@codefaktor.de> wrote in
news:3DC83584.9050408@codefaktor.de: 

> André Malo wrote:
>> * Tim Gerundt wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I have a little suggestion for "/docs-2.0/mod/index.xml".
>>>In the documentation you use this "red" links for module links.
>>>I think at the module overview you should use this style, too.
>>
>>
>> folks, just wanna say, that Tim and me have already discussed that
>> before. I suggested him to ask on the list.
>>
>> My opinion is to stick with the current variant, because I think the
>> red highlighting breaks the flow a bit - but I'm unsure.
>> Would be nice, if someone could say something; it would only be a
>> small patch.
>>
>> nd
> 
> I don't like this idea. To get it really consistent we would also have
> to use the same font (courier, <code>) and that definitely wouldn't
> fit in there. Also the semantics are not the same: in continuous text
> the module-color/-font has the effect of highlighting the different
> link-types (directive, modules, ...) and to make it easier to
> differentiate them. In the module overview we have a list with
> different modules (headlines), nothing more; there is no need to
> differentiate. 
> 
> Apart from this i'm +1 on using red-/courier-links in the continuous
> text which follows the headlines (see obsolete modules).
> 

I agree with Erik.

Kess

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org

Re: module links at /docs-2.0/mod/index.xml

[Erik Abele <er...@codefaktor.de>]

André Malo wrote:
> * Tim Gerundt wrote:
> 
> 
>>I have a little suggestion for "/docs-2.0/mod/index.xml".
>>In the documentation you use this "red" links for module links.
>>I think at the module overview you should use this style, too.
> 
> 
> folks, just wanna say, that Tim and me have already discussed that before. 
> I suggested him to ask on the list.
> 
> My opinion is to stick with the current variant, because I think the red 
> highlighting breaks the flow a bit - but I'm unsure.
> Would be nice, if someone could say something; it would only be a small 
> patch.
> 
> nd

I don't like this idea. To get it really consistent we would also have 
to use the same font (courier, <code>) and that definitely wouldn't fit 
in there. Also the semantics are not the same: in continuous text the 
module-color/-font has the effect of highlighting the different 
link-types (directive, modules, ...) and to make it easier to 
differentiate them. In the module overview we have a list with different 
modules (headlines), nothing more; there is no need to differentiate.

Apart from this i'm +1 on using red-/courier-links in the continuous 
text which follows the headlines (see obsolete modules).

just my 2 cents ;-)

erik


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org