Re: JSON Functions and Operators Docs for v15

From: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: JSON Functions and Operators Docs for v15
Date: 2022-05-04 15:44:01
Message-ID: CAKFQuwbgw5EJL13xSWVUBYFXQSDXdQW48-heXT_TG-wVY0ZmrQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 8:39 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> "David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > Is there a thread I'm not finding where the upcoming JSON function
> > documentation is being made reasonably usable after doubling its size
> with
> > all the new JSON Table features that we've added? If nothing else, the
> > table of contents at the top of the page needs to be greatly expanded to
> > make seeing and navigating to all that is available a possibility.
>
> The entire structure of that text needs to be rethought, IMO, as it
> has been written with precisely no concern for fitting into our
> hard-won structure for func.sgml. Andrew muttered something about
> rewriting it awhile ago, but I don't know what progress he's made.
>
>
I suppose regardless of the answer, or which thread is used for the patch,
the question at hand is whether this is problematic enough to warrant an
open item. I would lean toward yes, we can decide how much reworking is
considered sufficient to clear the open item separately.

David J.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2022-05-04 15:45:55 Re: automatically generating node support functions
Previous Message Justin Pryzby 2022-05-04 15:42:48 Re: JSON Functions and Operators Docs for v15