Re: [boost] [ANN] New documentation style sheet

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-06 20:25:48

Here's one man's opinion

a) I prefer the larger fonts
b) I don't like the detail for each libray.  What I would like to see is
an expandable index using the control Jonathon Turkanis made so
that we would ahve one level visiable:
+Any
+Array
+Date-Time
+...
c) Boost. before every library is redundant and annoying
e) The libraries alphabetically could also have the same +/- expandability.
f) It only includes the library generated by ? some procedure which
I haven't had the time to figure out yet
g)"Documentation for some of the libaries is available in alternative 
formats..."
I thought the whole idea was to be able to make the documents once and
have all the other formats generated automatically - So I would expect
this sentence to read something like )"Documentation for the above
listed libraries is also available in the following alternative formats"
h) I never understood why we made a whole new system to do this
rather than leveraging on something already developed like LaTex, Troff,
or?  I'm sure there's a good reason.  I would be curious to know what it is

Robert Ramey

Eric Niebler wrote:
> The good folks at boost-docs have been working on improving the
> look-and-feel of Boost's documentation. This work is based largely on
> Rene Rivera's website redesign. The change went in to both HEAD and
> the release branch a few days ago. The biggest change is a smaller
> font.
> We've also improved readability by eliminating colored backgrounds,
> and improved the presentation of many elements of the
> Doxygen-generated reference sections.
>
> Please take a moment to have a look at the new docs:
> http://tinyurl.com/4b9gc. Compare to the style of the 1.33.1 docs
> here: http://tinyurl.com/rujfh.
>
> (I notice that there is some strangeness at the bottom of the
> libraries.html file the above link takes you to. There should be an
> alphabetized lists of libraries, and instead there is a fragment of
> the Boost.Concept_check documentation. That's clearly a bug, but it's
> not related to the style change.)
>
> Report any problems with the new style to
> boost-docs_at_lists.sourceforge.net.
>
> Thanks,