Re: Tables in the APG

Apologies.  I did not remember being pinged about this.  I will put it into
my queue.

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 4:50 AM, Michiel Bijl <> wrote:

> As discussed during CSUN; all editors accept this change; use headings
> instead of tables for design pattern description. I’ve finished the edits
> <>. There is a rawgit version
> <> available.
> I would like to merge this into master just to prevent any conflicts with
> future edits.
> One thing that remains is that we need to figure out how to exclude the
> sub-headings within the design patterns—since these repeat for all of them;
> it get’s tiresome real quick and makes the TOC longer than necessary. I’ve
> contacted Shane about this, but have not yet heard back from him. I’ve
> included him in this e-mail as a reminder :)
> —Michiel
> On 19 Mar 2016, at 00:06, Michiel Bijl <> wrote:
> Hi Matt,
> With the new stylesheet came a bug—originating in the APG stylesheet—;
> tables are now too wide for moderate screen widths if they have more than
> two columns. We can quite easily change this. However, this made me think,
> why is all design pattern information (the characteristics) in a table
> anyway?
> I’ve discussed this with James, and I think it would be interesting to see
> how the document would look and feel if we used headings in stead of the
> tables. I’ll create a branch and work on this. I’ll try to have it finished
> somewhere tonight (10PM PST).
> If there is any good reason why this information is in a table, I’d gladly
> hear about it.
> —Michiel

Shane McCarron
Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.

Received on Thursday, 31 March 2016 11:25:43 UTC