On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Ralf Gommers firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 9:57 PM, email@example.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Alan G Isaac firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
On 3/21/2010 12:54 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
too many blank lines are needed
Please define "need" after seeing the compact example I posted.
Personally, I think reST makes the right trade-offs, minimizing markup within the constraint of being unambiguous.
last night, but no version looks really nice. I didn't manage the definition list.
The mode parameter description is an example for the most common case when we need to do lists in the Parameters descriptions.
But I don't think we have consistent use of markup for this case until now
One alternative is here: http://docs.scipy.org/scipy/docs/scipy.interpolate.rbf.Rbf/
A good example that can be used as pattern and is acceptable would be useful.
Both look sort of okay, but are abusing the syntax.
What do you think about the following:
- Do not use lists with multiple indentation levels, it just doesn't look
good and should not be necessary. 2. Use dashes for simple lists.
both fine with me, we can convert asterisks to dashes
- List with multi-line items are broken only inside the Parameters/Returns
sections. This is a bug and simply needs to be fixed. (this would fix both of your examples)
Does this mean if this bug gets fixed, then we wouldn't need the extra empty lines between list items?
Currently, the rendering in the doc editor view for item lists has also wrong indentation http://docs.scipy.org/numpy/docs/numpy.ndarray.transpose/ but the html looks ok http://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy/reference/generated/numpy.ndarray.transpose....
(correctly rendered definition lists might be nicer than bullet lists in html)
NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion