[boost] Re: Serialization Menu

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-15 07:49:34

"Jonathan Turkanis" <technews_at_[hidden]> writes:

> "Vladimir Prus" <ghost_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> news:200407151037.40144.ghost_at_cs.msu.su...
>> Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
>>
>> > I think Robert's menu is very effective, and was hoping it
> represented
>> > a de facto relaxation of the no-script policy.
>>
>> I have some reservation
>>
>> 1. It does not work very nice when image loading is turned off (as
> it is for
>> me).
>
> Good point -- I hadn't thought of that. It's possible -- using tiny
> HTML tables -- to generate the icons without using any image files
> :-P ... but I'd like to know how many people turn image loading off.
>
>> 2. It takes qutie a lot of screen space.
>
> I guess this is a matter of taste. Some existing libraries have a
> navigation panel on the left (maybe PP is the only one), so this issue
> isn't really related to scripting.

No, but frames present a different problem: it can be hard to link to
individual pages in the doc.

Ultimately the ideal thing would be that the browser "thinks" it's
visiting an address that causes the index and content pages to come
up exactly as they're being viewed, but I've never seen a
frames-based interface that works that way.

The best thing I can suggest is that we include a "link to this page"
link on each page of documentation.

>> I think it's probably better to somehow make all new libraries use
>> Boost.Book.  If that's done, any presentation issues can be solved
>> in one place.  For example, I think there were already discussion
>> about expandable TOC on the boost-doc failings list.
>
> This may be a good solution. But I think there would still be a need
> for a javascript component for use by Boost.Book. From my point of
> view -- if I'm writing the script -- it makes no difference whether
> it's to be used by individual library authors or by Boost.Book.

Yes.

>> At all events, I'd prefer constistent look of all Boost library
>> docs (and the ability to print them), to every author introducing
>> something they like.
>
> I agree completely.

But can we agree on a look/feel that works?  Several library authors
seem convinced that the "usual conventions" are broken and won't be
satisfied unless they can stamp their own notions of usability on
their docs.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com