1. Patchew
  2. Libvirt
  3. [libvirt] [PATCH v2 0/2] Enum formating changes
  4. View patch

[libvirt] [PATCH v2 2/2] docs: css: Make docs page wider while still accomodating narrow screens

Peter Krempa posted 2 patches 7 years ago
[libvirt] [PATCH v2 2/2] docs: css: Make docs page wider while still accomodating narrow screens
Posted by Peter Krempa 7 years ago 
Bump the width to 85em while keeping a maximum width of 90%.

Signed-off-by: Peter Krempa <pkrempa@redhat.com>
---
 docs/libvirt.css | 5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/docs/libvirt.css b/docs/libvirt.css
index c5fe27fa3f..dcae2a338a 100644
--- a/docs/libvirt.css
+++ b/docs/libvirt.css
@@ -100,14 +100,15 @@
     margin-right: auto;
     padding: 0px;
     padding-bottom: 1em;
-    max-width: 60em;
+    max-width: 90%;
+    width: 85em;
 }

 body.index #content,
 body.docs #content,
 body.hvsupport #content
 {
-    max-width: inherit;
+    width: inherit;
 }

 pre {
-- 
2.20.1

--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
Re: [libvirt] [PATCH v2 2/2] docs: css: Make docs page wider while still accomodating narrow screens
Posted by Daniel P. Berrangé 7 years ago 
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 04:32:36PM +0100, Peter Krempa wrote:
> Bump the width to 85em while keeping a maximum width of 90%.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Krempa <pkrempa@redhat.com>
> ---
>  docs/libvirt.css | 5 +++--
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/docs/libvirt.css b/docs/libvirt.css
> index c5fe27fa3f..dcae2a338a 100644
> --- a/docs/libvirt.css
> +++ b/docs/libvirt.css
> @@ -100,14 +100,15 @@
>      margin-right: auto;
>      padding: 0px;
>      padding-bottom: 1em;
> -    max-width: 60em;
> +    max-width: 90%;
> +    width: 85em;
>  }

FYI, the reason I originally chose 60em is because that is commonly
considered to be the optimal length for readability

   https://baymard.com/blog/line-length-readability

This is more important for large blocks of text, eg magazine articles
blog posts, etc. Our APIs docs have alot more structured information,
even though it does have some blocks of text as description it is not
so critical to adhere to the normal guidelines.  We also potentially
have trouble where very long C identifiers might force unnatural line
breaks in our API docs.

Personally I do still find it easier to read the APIs docs with the
narrower 60em width than 85em.

Was there a particular reason you picked 85ems or was it arbitrary,
and where there specific parts of the docs that had trouble with
60 ems ?   I'm wondering if some figure inbetween might cope with
the bad bits you saw, without making things quite so wide.
eg would  70em be sufficient ?

> 
>  body.index #content,
>  body.docs #content,
>  body.hvsupport #content
>  {
> -    max-width: inherit;
> +    width: inherit;
>  }
> 
>  pre {

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|

--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
Re: [libvirt] [PATCH v2 2/2] docs: css: Make docs page wider while still accomodating narrow screens
Posted by Peter Krempa 7 years ago 
On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 16:31:56 +0000, Daniel Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 04:32:36PM +0100, Peter Krempa wrote:
> > Bump the width to 85em while keeping a maximum width of 90%.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Krempa <pkrempa@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  docs/libvirt.css | 5 +++--
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/docs/libvirt.css b/docs/libvirt.css
> > index c5fe27fa3f..dcae2a338a 100644
> > --- a/docs/libvirt.css
> > +++ b/docs/libvirt.css
> > @@ -100,14 +100,15 @@
> >      margin-right: auto;
> >      padding: 0px;
> >      padding-bottom: 1em;
> > -    max-width: 60em;
> > +    max-width: 90%;
> > +    width: 85em;
> >  }
> 
> FYI, the reason I originally chose 60em is because that is commonly
> considered to be the optimal length for readability
> 
>    https://baymard.com/blog/line-length-readability
> 
> This is more important for large blocks of text, eg magazine articles
> blog posts, etc. Our APIs docs have alot more structured information,
> even though it does have some blocks of text as description it is not
> so critical to adhere to the normal guidelines.  We also potentially
> have trouble where very long C identifiers might force unnatural line
> breaks in our API docs.
> 
> Personally I do still find it easier to read the APIs docs with the
> narrower 60em width than 85em.
> 
> Was there a particular reason you picked 85ems or was it arbitrary,
> and where there specific parts of the docs that had trouble with
> 60 ems ?   I'm wondering if some figure inbetween might cope with
> the bad bits you saw, without making things quite so wide.
> eg would  70em be sufficient ?

70em is okay for me. Basically the reason was that 60em does not even
fill my portrait monitor with rather oldschool resolution and e.g. in
cases of the enum description boxes the description gets too many
linebreaks which are harder to follow if the line does not start at the
left border.

Said that, my screen is not much wider than the 60em we have normally
but I'm not entirely a fan of excesive borders or no borders at all.
That's the reason to change max-width to a percent measurement and set
width. In this case I'd even change it to 95% which leaves enough
border.

In the end none of this is critical. I have lots of CSS overrides for
many webpages so I can install one more :)
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
Re: [libvirt] [PATCH v2 2/2] docs: css: Make docs page wider while still accomodating narrow screens
Posted by Daniel P. Berrangé 7 years ago 
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 09:44:56AM +0100, Peter Krempa wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 16:31:56 +0000, Daniel Berrange wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 04:32:36PM +0100, Peter Krempa wrote:
> > > Bump the width to 85em while keeping a maximum width of 90%.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Peter Krempa <pkrempa@redhat.com>
> > > ---
> > >  docs/libvirt.css | 5 +++--
> > >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/docs/libvirt.css b/docs/libvirt.css
> > > index c5fe27fa3f..dcae2a338a 100644
> > > --- a/docs/libvirt.css
> > > +++ b/docs/libvirt.css
> > > @@ -100,14 +100,15 @@
> > >      margin-right: auto;
> > >      padding: 0px;
> > >      padding-bottom: 1em;
> > > -    max-width: 60em;
> > > +    max-width: 90%;
> > > +    width: 85em;
> > >  }
> > 
> > FYI, the reason I originally chose 60em is because that is commonly
> > considered to be the optimal length for readability
> > 
> >    https://baymard.com/blog/line-length-readability
> > 
> > This is more important for large blocks of text, eg magazine articles
> > blog posts, etc. Our APIs docs have alot more structured information,
> > even though it does have some blocks of text as description it is not
> > so critical to adhere to the normal guidelines.  We also potentially
> > have trouble where very long C identifiers might force unnatural line
> > breaks in our API docs.
> > 
> > Personally I do still find it easier to read the APIs docs with the
> > narrower 60em width than 85em.
> > 
> > Was there a particular reason you picked 85ems or was it arbitrary,
> > and where there specific parts of the docs that had trouble with
> > 60 ems ?   I'm wondering if some figure inbetween might cope with
> > the bad bits you saw, without making things quite so wide.
> > eg would  70em be sufficient ?
> 
> 70em is okay for me. Basically the reason was that 60em does not even
> fill my portrait monitor with rather oldschool resolution and e.g. in
> cases of the enum description boxes the description gets too many
> linebreaks which are harder to follow if the line does not start at the
> left border.
> 
> Said that, my screen is not much wider than the 60em we have normally
> but I'm not entirely a fan of excesive borders or no borders at all.
> That's the reason to change max-width to a percent measurement and set
> width. In this case I'd even change it to 95% which leaves enough
> border.
> 
> In the end none of this is critical. I have lots of CSS overrides for
> many webpages so I can install one more :)

Lets push with 70em then, as it is desirable to avoid enum descriptions
getting wrapped too aggressively.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|

--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list

Patchew 2.1-devel-b67e4c2

© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.