Horton

Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Steven Pousty <steve.pousty@gmail.com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>, Isaac Morland <isaac.morland@gmail.com>, Pierre Giraud <pierre.giraud@dalibo.com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2020-04-27T12:49:41Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
"Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org> writes:
> Great. I do want to do a bit more desultory testing in the older
> versions of the docs, but it can be committed whenever the -docs side is
> ready.

Other than that point, the main.css patch as I presented it just adds
some rules that aren't used yet, so it could be pushed as soon as you're
satisfied about the !important change.  It'd probably make sense to
push it in advance of making the markup changes, so we don't have an
interval of near-unreadable devel docs.

Still waiting to hear whether this markup approach satisfies
Peter's concerns, though.

			regards, tom lane

Commits

  1. Doc: re-re-revise markup for tables of functions.

  2. Doc: revise formatting of function/operator tables.