From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-09 13:45:34
From: "Rozental, Gennadiy" <Gennadiy_at_[hidden]>
> > it can only be
> > viewed with certain web browsers, and those pages cannot be reliably
> > printed.
> I do not believe that is true.
> (it's better then let say C++ compilers conformance to C++ standart).
> is as important as usage of external style sheets.
If you want to manage repetetive tasks, you can build an html generator
of your choice.
> Preprocessor docs hides bulky example to prevent obscuring reference page
> content. Note that MSDN site doing the same.
> to the styling.
> 6. According to recent info in net ~95-97 present of browsers domain is
> covered by ie and clones. Among the developers numbers are different of
> course but ie still prevail I think. All others browsers try to keep up
> de facto standard ie. Though I would not want to discuss this point too
??! Beman's reasons were at least as "real" as that list you gave above.
the same kind of issues.
Your Boost.Test page is behaving strangely on IE 6.0 under WinXP. When I
first arrived there, the page had a gray background and a border. One click
on that annoying animated menu and it turned white forever. So much for
de-facto standards and portable code.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but that menu is a prime example of poor
user-interface design. The animation adds nothing, but makes it
harder-to-use by hiding the thing I need to click on until I move past it.
this sort of interface "cuteness".
> may be we
> could consider giving it at least some chances to be usable?
It's already wasted too much time; arguing about and debugging each piece
David Abrahams * Boost Consulting
dave_at_[hidden] * http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk