[Octave-patch-tracker] [patch #9002] generate_html : Adding package_doc_options field to generate texinfo documentation

[Olaf Till]

Follow-up Comment #18, patch #9002 (project octave):

To comment on some of these issues:

I'm in favour of having a default style sheet for package_doc. I can't say if
it should be separate from the octave-forge style sheet or not.

(My personal opinion: The default style sheet should change as little as
possible, the current layout without a style sheet seems quite acceptable to
me. Readability of text and clear structuring are important. Beautifying,
especially of text, can distract from the content.)

If the package maintainer has reasons to use a non-default style sheet -- why
not, no objections against an option for this.

I actually didn't link from package_doc to the standard function reference,
and I wouldn't like to do it. For package_doc, I extract the function help
texts separately and sometimes change them slightly (e.g. by cutting out some
marked text) to better fit into the structure of the package_doc. Also, I
sometimes embed the function help text into the text of an info page.

(But I'm not happy with the duplication of information by the standard
function reference. If a package_doc already contains all function help texts,
cooked up to fit into the package_doc, this source of information should
probably be preferred over the standard function reference. OTOH the standard
function reference could be valuable as a collection of all function help
texts. Maybe it should be named this way: 'Collection of function help texts'
or so, not 'Function reference', in order to avoid misleading users away from
package_doc -- at least in cases where the package_doc includes all function
help texts.)

    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?9002>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/