A new render of newxml

Ken Moffat ken at kenmoffat.uklinux.net
Sun May 2 09:23:38 PDT 2004

On Sun, 2 May 2004, Jeroen Coumans wrote:

> That's stupid. People read from top to bottom. The most logical place
> for navigational links is thus at the bottom. What are their reasons for
> placing them at the top?

 Go away from the idea that "one way of reading" fits all.  If you are
following the book from A to Z in one go, then an inline "nochunks" or
text version is great, and links at the bottom are good.  If you are
coming back and can't quite remember where you got to, looking at the
start of a package and thinking "yes, did that, next:" may be more
appropriate.  There are lots of different reasons to visit or re-visit a
particular page.

 Convention says that navigation at top and bottom of a page is usually
well-received, but I know better than to argue for something in LFS just
because it's conventional. :)

 das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list