Armin K. wrote:
> On 06/28/2013 09:47 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>
>> For a source perspective, your version is easier to read, but from a
>> rendered perspective, it's not. The problem is a long list of very
>> similar directory names and it's hard to visualize the similar vs
>> dissimilar parts in the rendered book.
>>
>> -- Bruce
>>
>>
>
> I don't really understand what you want to say. I never noticed any
> problems with rendering of the pages as they were before.
There isn't a problem with rendering. The problem is reading. When
most people read a long line with repeated contents, the brain tends to
misinterpret the line. Not explicitly repeating the stem of the
directories makes it easier to read.
Read
/usr/include/subdir1/subdir2, /usr/include/subdir1/subdir3,
/usr/include/subdir1/subdir4
vs
/usr/include/subdir1/subdir{2,3,4}
Of course this can be overdone with multiple inclusions such as
a/{b,c/{d,e}}
I wouldn't have a problem with your layout if it was vertically aligned,
but that differs from the rest of the book.
/usr/include/subdir1/subdir2
/usr/include/subdir1/subdir3
/usr/include/subdir1/subdir4
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
