bootDoc - advanced DDoc framework using Twitter's Bootstrap
Steven Schveighoffer
schveiguy at yahoo.com
Fri May 4 08:11:39 PDT 2012
On Fri, 04 May 2012 10:59:46 -0400, Jakob Ovrum <jakobovrum at gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Friday, 4 May 2012 at 14:48:04 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>
>> packages that a module is in. For example, etc.c.sqlite3 is in
>> packages etc and c. If we make those breadcrumbs instead of part of a
>> large tree, it can get around your worry about whitespace, because they
>> don't need separate indentation.
>
> That's a great idea, but where in the tree would it appear? What would
> happen to the rest of the modules, should they be indented like they are
> now? Wouldn't that look a little weird?
I was envisioning eliminating the rest of the tree, and you'd have to
click on one of the breadcrumbs to get it back. But that might be weird.
Something like:
etc . c .
sqlite3
* func1
* func2
...
And then you click on etc or c, and get the module tree back (either
dynamically or after a round-trip from the server).
The idea is, when you are navigating in a module, you are interested in
the module, not the rest of the modules.
I personally am not as much concerned about how many clicks it takes to
navigate as much as I'm concerned about making the tree more focused on
what you are doing now.
-Steve
More information about the Digitalmars-d-announce
mailing list