Re: [HIG] Mini-Guidelines style



Catching up on email, just wanted to voice my accord.

On 10 Aug 2001 16:50:48 +0100, colin z robertson wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 10, 2001 at 07:19:24AM -0700, Adam Elman wrote:
> > >>  Topics under these subsections should be marked as <h3>.  No headers
> > >>  below <h3> should be present.
> > >
> > >Why not?
> > 
> > Just to keep the structure of the documents a little simpler.  I'd 
> > reconsider this if there is objection.
> 
> It just seems to me that if it can be divided up to a finer degree
> then we should allow it to be done in a structured way. I actually
> suspect it will be possible to divide up this sort of thing quite
> finely. Maybe it's just my writing style but I've found myself going
> down to h4.
> 
> 
> > Again, I don't want to get too bogged down in semantics, and to do 
> > this _right_ we would need to specify it even clearer than this.  I'd 
> > rather get this written and published quickly in HTML than in a 
> > transformable way.
> > 
> > The only structure I think it's important to preserve is structural, 
> > and that I see us doing through the use of headings.  That will allow 
> > us to build navigation and a style via CSS.  But I'm open to 
> > discussion on this. :)
> 
> Fair enough.
> 

I've not worked with docbook before but I have no objection to learning
it. The glossary I have at the moment is HTML with a little CSS, but
I'll look have a look at the GDP help and see if I can sed it over to
SGML. I've also considered making use of the DICT format which should
make the glossaries readily available. (It might be a good idea to look
at making dict an integral part of some apps, but more later.)

> 
> > >Do we want to be PNG purists here?
> > 
> > I don't particularly, but I don't care a whole lot either way.  If 
> > there is an official GNOME policy on this I think we should stick to 
> > it.  I note that the images on the GNOME home page are PNG's, so 
> > that's probably a good way to go.
> 
> The official GNOME policy is no gifs (because of the patents).
> 
> colin

I favor that we keep to this policy for the same reason we have it.

-- 
Greg Merchan
(auspex)





[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]