[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GDP: length/page-splitting of subsections
From: |
John Mandereau |
Subject: |
Re: GDP: length/page-splitting of subsections |
Date: |
Mon, 10 Sep 2007 17:11:34 +0200 |
Le lundi 10 septembre 2007 à 08:00 -0700, Graham Percival a écrit :
> To summarize some discussions:
> - there seems to be considerable dislike for the current
> "one-short-subsection-per-HTML-page" layout of the manual. That
> surprises me, since I've never had a problem with it, but of course I'm
> intimately familiar with the layout of the manual, so I'm happy to
> disregard my own opinion in this matter.
>
> - Does anybody _like_ the current layout? If so, speak up now or
> forever hold your peace. :)
>
>
> There are two solutions for this:
> 1) Don't split HTML by into subsections; have one html page per section.
>
> 2) Merge many subsections. For example,
> 6.1 Pitches
> 6.1.1 Writing pitches (includes 6.1.1, 6.1.2, 6.1.3, 6.1.4, and 6.1.5
> in the latest proposal)
> 6.1.2 Octaves/jumping pitches (includes 6.1.6, 6.1.7, and 7.1.8)
> 6.1.3 Rests (includes 6.1.9 and 6.10)
>
> the names obviously need work.
>
>
> My preference is for 2 -- I can't believe that users want to see
> articulations, dynamics, and trills on the same HTML page. But as I
> said, we should probably disregard my opinion on this issue.
I vote for option 2 too, as it's a better compromise between easier full
text search and load time when reading docs online.
John
Message not available
Re: GDP: length/page-splitting of subsections, Mats Bengtsson, 2007/09/11