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

On 4/29/20 7:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> After further fooling with this issue, I've determined that
>
> (1) I need to be able to use <programlisting> environments within the
> func_table_entry cells and have them render more-or-less normally.
> There doesn't seem to be any other good way to render multiline
> example results for set-returning functions ... but marking such
> environments up to the extent that the website style normally does
> is very distracting.
>
> (2) I found that adding !important to the func_table_entry rules
> is enough to override less-general !important rules. So it'd be
> possible to leave all the existing CSS rules alone, if that makes
> you feel more comfortable.
>
> The attached updated patch reflects both of these conclusions.
> We could take out some of the !important annotations here if
> you're willing to delete !important annotations in more-global
> rules for <p> and/or <pre>, but maybe that's something to fool
> with later. I'd like to get this done sooner ...

My preference would be to figure out the CSS rules that are causing you
to rely on !important at the table level and just fix that up, rather
than hacking in too many !important.

I'll compromise on the temporary importants, but first I want to see
what's causing the need for it. Do you have a suggestion on a page to test?

Jonathan