From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Questionable tag usage |
Date: | 2017-01-10 15:58:08 |
Message-ID: | 22261.1484063888@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 10:18 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> I don't think there are a lto of people who use dead tree editions anymore,
>>> but they certainly do exist. A lot of people use the PDFs though,
>>> particularly for offline reading or loading them in ebook readers. So it
>>> still has to be workable there.
>> PDFs do have hyperlinks, so that in itself isn't an argument for keeping
>> the dead-tree-friendly approach. However, I've noticed some variation
>> among tools in whether a PDF hyperlink is visibly distinct, or whether
>> you have to mouse over it to find out that it would take you somewhere.
>> Not sure if that's enough of a usability fail to argue for keeping the
>> old way.
> Personally, I wouldn't sweat it.
Um ... are you expressing an opinion on the question at hand (ie, whether
to continue using "see section m.n"-type cross-references), and if so
in which direction?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2017-01-10 16:13:12 | Re: [HACKERS] Questionable tag usage |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-01-10 15:54:21 | Re: [HACKERS] Questionable tag usage |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-01-10 15:58:45 | Re: background sessions |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-01-10 15:55:15 | Re: RustgreSQL |