Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:32:45 -0500 From: Thomas Hoffmann <trh411@gmail.com> To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Cc: Glen Barber <gjb@freebsd.org>, Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: docs/144515: [handbook] Expand handbook Table of contents Message-ID: <CAB7-odmvtQqOt6B5u9AzPZh8dRkfgEc5oGnKhUyGeNBQ7CiHfw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <52E140D1.5090809@FreeBSD.org> References: <201401221442.s0MEgd2o082802@freefall.freebsd.org> <52E075F7.7020105@a1poweruser.com> <20140123020029.GE52955@glenbarber.us> <52E1053A.8000608@a1poweruser.com> <834FD10A-0519-42F1-B804-DCE7428A863F@FreeBSD.org> <CAB7-odngKOODXCtD2NsxzG-8v5y5TFtxe-SRTSUujZ7wesy%2BrA@mail.gmail.com> <52E13ACC.2020005@FreeBSD.org> <CAB7-odk36PQawmUG=LyDu1wXcnSVqmxtT7n1AkFL4T19rC_=_Q@mail.gmail.com> <52E140D1.5090809@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 2014.01.23. 16:59, Thomas Hoffmann wrote: > >> I agree, the TOC is already too long vertically. Adding subsections would >> exacerbate the problem. >> >> By "horizontal page" I mean taking advantage of the full screen width, >> for example, by using multi-columns or similar technique. That would get >> more info on each screen page. Compare the TOC with the x-config.html page >> ( http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/x-config.html), >> which uses the full page width. >> > The problem with this is that TOC is a multiple level enumeration by > nature, which is conventionally listed vertically in order. Using two > columns may be confusing for people since it is not conventional. And if we > use 2 columns, what order would it follow? Like this: > > 1 2 > 1.1 2.1 > 1.2 2.2 > 1.3 2.3 > > Or this: > > 1 > 1.1 1.2 > 1.3 1.4 > > And what to do on smaller screens if the two columns do not fit? > > I believe that a collapsible tree list would be the best option but that > requires JavaScript, which we prefer to avoid... > > Gabor > Top to bottom, left to right would be the normal "western" approach, no? Personally, I would have no problem with a TOC that only listed the major chapters. If you want the details sections/subsections) you would drill (click) down as required: 1. 6. 2. 7. 3 8. 4. 9. 5. 10. or even 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. etc. It would require less scrolling, but this might be objectionable to many. I understand completely your desire to avoid JS. This may simply be an intractable problem. -Tom
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAB7-odmvtQqOt6B5u9AzPZh8dRkfgEc5oGnKhUyGeNBQ7CiHfw>