On 4/13/20 6:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > "Jonathan S. Katz" <jk...@postgresql.org> writes: >> I think one thing that was throwing me off was having the function >> signature before the description. I would recommend flipping them: have >> the function description first, followed by signature, followed be >> examples. I think that follows the natural flow more of what one is >> doing when they look up the function. > > The trouble with that is it doesn't work very well when we have > multiple similarly-named functions with different signatures. > Consider what the two enum_range() entries in 9.33 will look like, > for example. I think we need the signature to establish which function > we're talking about.
I get that, I just find I'm doing too much thinking looking at it. Perhaps a counterproposal: We eliminate the content in the leftmost "function column, but leave that there to allow the function name / signature to span the full 3 columns. Then the rest of the info goes below. This will also compress the table height down a bit. >> There are probably some things we can do with shading on the pgweb side >> to make items more distinguishable, I don't think that would be too >> terrible to add. > > Per David's earlier comment, it seems like alternating backgrounds might > be feasible if we can get it down to one <row> per function, as the > version I just posted has. or a classname on the "<tr>" when a new function starts or the like. Easy enough to get the CSS to work off of that :) Jonathan
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
