I have deleted the zero-width spaces. I'm waiting for more feedback on this
topic before I do anything more radical.

Clark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Spicer [mailto:jhs_at_[hidden]]
> Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2016 12:25 PM
> To: Nelson, Clark
> Cc: features_at_[hidden] (features_at_[hidden])
> Subject: Re: [SG10] SD-6 document structure
>
>
> > On Jul 22, 2016, at 7:59 PM, Nelson, Clark
> <clark.nelson_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >
> > A year or so ago I mentioned that I thought it would be good idea
> for SD-6
> > to have an index of macro names. I haven't done anything about
> that yet, but
> > I haven't forgotten about it.
> >
> > More recently, it seems to me that the document has gotten fairly
> > cumbersome. I'm starting to think that it would be helpful if all
> the
> > rationale (including examples) appeared in a separate HTML file
> from the
> > tables, even if it were logically considered part of the same
> document.
>
> I like the idea of having one document that is essentially just the
> table and moving the other information into separate document(s).
>
> >
> > It seems to me it might also simplify the maintenance of the index
> if it
> > were in a separate HTML file.
> >
> > Does anyone think the idea of splitting up the logical document
> into
> > separate physical documents would be particularly good or bad?
> >
> > On a somewhat related topic, as an experiment I have introduced
> zero-width
> > spaces into some of the longer macro names. The idea was to try to
> get the
> > tables presented in a more reasonable width. OTOH, I'm afraid that
> will
> > tend to mess up searches for the macro names. OYAH, if we had an
> index,
> > impacting string searches would be less serious.
>
> I think it would be better to avoid zero-width spaces as that would
> also impair searching within the document.
>
> >
> > And here's another idea that has occurred to me. Today, in the
> rationale
> > section, I have HTML comments that name a paper's author, and the
> > contributor of whatever rationale or example we have. But it might
> be useful
> > to have that information available in the content of the document,
> so people
> > can easily find stuff that's relevant to them (without having to
> dig into
> > the HTML). To make that work would really require CSS tricks --
> but the way
> > SD-6 is currently published on isocpp.org (i.e. wiki-like
> markdown), CSS
> > can't really be used. So even if we don't want to split up the
> document, we
> > might want to change the way SD-6 is hosted on isocpp.org.
>
> It the explanatory information and rationale were in a separate
> document we might be able to just have that information always be
> present in the displayed text.
>
> John.
>
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> > Clark
> > _______________________________________________
> > Features mailing list
> > Features_at_[hidden]
> > http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/features