[DOCS] 7.4 official docs : Fonts?

#1

Have the fonts gone wild in the new 7.4 documentation?

In the tables describing the functions and
operators and in the table of contents,
there are at least three different fonts
of varied sizes. The usage for different types
of objects seems to be fairly consistent,
however, the varied sizes of the different fonts
make things very hard to read.

Is there anything I or someone can do to help this problem?

elein

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo (AT) postgresql (DOT) org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

#2

People,

Quote:

of varied sizes. The usage for different types
of objects seems to be fairly consistent,
however, the varied sizes of the different fonts
make things very hard to read.

Elein is correct, our variety of styles does look odd and can cause issues=
=20
with readability. See, for example,=20
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/curre...ns-string.html

Can we experiment with different SGML-to-HMTL font styles to find one that'=
s a=20
little easier on the eyes? What I find particularly difficult are the=20
function parameter columns; the mix of "normal" italics with "bold" italics.

Comments? Responses?

--=20
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo (AT) postgresql (DOT) org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

#3

Peter Eisentraut writes:

Quote:

Elein is correct, our variety of styles does look odd and can cause issues
with readability. See, for example,
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/curre...ns-string.html

Compare with the "original" version:

http://developer.postgresql.org/docs...ns-string.html

That looks fairly reasonable to me. So the problem appears to be in the
CSS stylesheets.

This page puts the discrepancies in words:

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/curre.../notation.html

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e (AT) gmx (DOT) net

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo (AT) postgresql (DOT) org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

#4

On Thursday, November 20, 2003, at 05:10 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:

Quote:

Can we experiment with different SGML-to-HMTL font styles to find one=20
that's a
little easier on the eyes? What I find particularly difficult are the
function parameter columns; the mix of "normal" italics with "bold"=20
italics.

Comments? Responses?

As Peter has pointed out, the CSS can handle a lot of it. It doesn't=20
have to be hardcoded into the SGML-to-HTML transformation. One option=20
would be to use colors as well (I'm not talking a rainbow of fruit=20
flavors here

. In particular, I find italics often difficult to read=20
on the web. I'll try to get a few styles worked up by tomorrow that=20
could just be added to the css file=97we can change the actual structure=20
of the HTML later.

Michael

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match

#5

Michael Glaesemann wrote:

Quote:

On Thursday, November 20, 2003, at 05:10 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
Can we experiment with different SGML-to-HMTL font styles to find one
that's a
little easier on the eyes? What I find particularly difficult are the
function parameter columns; the mix of "normal" italics with "bold"
italics.

Comments? Responses?

As Peter has pointed out, the CSS can handle a lot of it. It doesn't
have to be hardcoded into the SGML-to-HTML transformation. One option
would be to use colors as well (I'm not talking a rainbow of fruit
flavors here

. In particular, I find italics often difficult to read
on the web. I'll try to get a few styles worked up by tomorrow that

I think it is the monospace italics that really look bad.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman (AT) candle (DOT) pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend

#6

On Thursday, November 20, 2003, at 12:56 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:

Quote:

Michael Glaesemann wrote:

On Thursday, November 20, 2003, at 05:10 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
Can we experiment with different SGML-to-HMTL font styles to find one
that's a
little easier on the eyes? What I find particularly difficult are
the
function parameter columns; the mix of "normal" italics with "bold"
italics.

Comments? Responses?

As Peter has pointed out, the CSS can handle a lot of it. It doesn't
have to be hardcoded into the SGML-to-HTML transformation. One option
would be to use colors as well (I'm not talking a rainbow of fruit
flavors here

. In particular, I find italics often difficult to read
on the web. I'll try to get a few styles worked up by tomorrow that

I think it is the monospace italics that really look bad.

I'd have to agree with you. Making them a color other than the text
(black) or the links (blue/purple depending on your eyes) would set
them off quite well. Serif fonts at small sizes can also be pretty
nasty, though this isn't an issue with the PostgreSQL docs.

Michael

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo (AT) postgresql (DOT) org)

#7

[sNip]

Quote:

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/curre...ns-string.html
[sNip]
Whatever we had in 7.3 we should switch back to:

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.3/s...ns-string.html

I think the fancy fonts should be abandonded altogether in favour of
using the web browser's default fonts. In Opera, the text on both of those
page (quoted above) are difficult to read because the choice of font is
horrible.

--
Randolf Richardson - rr (AT) 8x (DOT) ca
Inter-Corporate Computer & Network Services, Inc.
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
http://www.8x.ca/

This message originated from within a secure, reliable,
high-performance network ... a Novell NetWare network.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo (AT) postgresql (DOT) org

#8

At 2:11 PM +0900 11/20/03, Michael Glaesemann wrote:

Quote:

On Thursday, November 20, 2003, at 12:56 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:

Michael Glaesemann wrote:

On Thursday, November 20, 2003, at 05:10 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
Can we experiment with different SGML-to-HMTL font styles to find one
that's a
little easier on the eyes? What I find particularly difficult are the
function parameter columns; the mix of "normal" italics with "bold"
italics.

Comments? Responses?

As Peter has pointed out, the CSS can handle a lot of it. It doesn't
have to be hardcoded into the SGML-to-HTML transformation. One option
would be to use colors as well (I'm not talking a rainbow of fruit
flavors here

. In particular, I find italics often difficult to read
on the web. I'll try to get a few styles worked up by tomorrow that

I think it is the monospace italics that really look bad.

I'd have to agree with you. Making them a color other than the text
(black) or the links (blue/purple depending on your eyes) would set
them off quite well. Serif fonts at small sizes can also be pretty
nasty, though this isn't an issue with the PostgreSQL docs.

Color works well on-screen with html. Small-point-size italics are
hard to read on-screen, agreed.

Italics work well on B&W printout with PDF. (In general. I'm not
looking at the specific example.)

Can you map things somehow to get the best of both worlds?
--
The opinions expressed in this message are mine,
not those of Caltech, JPL, NASA, or the US Government.
Henry.B.Hotz (AT) jpl (DOT) nasa.gov, or hbhotz (AT) oxy (DOT) edu

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match

#9

On Friday, November 28, 2003, at 05:33 PM, Henry B. Hotz wrote:

Quote:

Color works well on-screen with html. Small-point-size italics are
hard to read on-screen, agreed.

Italics work well on B&W printout with PDF. (In general. I'm not
looking at the specific example.)

Can you map things somehow to get the best of both worlds?

If you're talking about printing from the browser, you can have
separate style sheets with different media targets, so media="screen"
could have the color, while media="print" could have italics. It's
really flexible. At work I have a form letter that's generated on
screen, and includes all of the navigation for moving around the site.
When you print the page, the media="print" style sheet omits the
navigation, restyles the page with different fonts and sizes, and adds
the number we want to fax it to (Yes, I know. We still use fax for a
large part of our interoffice correspondence. I'm trying to move us
away from that, but it's a hard slog.)

As for the PDF docs, they're formatting is indeed different. I assume
that the SGML to PDF path is different from the SGML to HTML path
(which is of course one of the benefits of using SGML).

Is this what you mean?

Michael

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match

#10

At 7:30 PM +0900 11/28/03, Michael Glaesemann wrote:

Quote:

On Friday, November 28, 2003, at 05:33 PM, Henry B. Hotz wrote:

Color works well on-screen with html. Small-point-size italics are
hard to read on-screen, agreed.

Italics work well on B&W printout with PDF. (In general. I'm not
looking at the specific example.)

Can you map things somehow to get the best of both worlds?

If you're talking about printing from the browser, you can have
separate style sheets with different media targets, so
media="screen" could have the color, while media="print" could have
italics. It's really flexible. At work I have a form letter that's
generated on screen, and includes all of the navigation for moving
around the site. When you print the page, the media="print" style
sheet omits the navigation, restyles the page with different fonts
and sizes, and adds the number we want to fax it to (Yes, I know. We
still use fax for a large part of our interoffice correspondence.
I'm trying to move us away from that, but it's a hard slog.)

As for the PDF docs, they're formatting is indeed different. I
assume that the SGML to PDF path is different from the SGML to HTML
path (which is of course one of the benefits of using SGML).

Is this what you mean?

Pretty much, yes. I don't care much about printing html. If I want
to print I figure I'm better off getting a PDF.

I just don't want to have to use a color printer.
--
The opinions expressed in this message are mine,
not those of Caltech, JPL, NASA, or the US Government.
Henry.B.Hotz (AT) jpl (DOT) nasa.gov, or hbhotz (AT) oxy (DOT) edu

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo (AT) postgresql (DOT) org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly