fried fish, available, for free

[Bowerbird at aol.com]

arno said:

>    Why is there no capitalization? 


i think capital letters look ugly, so i don't use 'em...       :+)

***

thank you all for the feedback.

you were right that the "<c>" thing is too confusing.
i went to images instead for that, and they're better.


>    http://jaguarps.com/tools/creeb-0610.html


as you can also see, i changed the links decoration,
to an underline.   i won't keep that, because it's too
distracting to a person who's reading, and they don't
need to be constantly reminded that headers are links,
or that the table of contents is links, or that footnotes
are linked, and backlinked too, or that u.r.l.s are links.

speaking of footnotes, i use a return-linking style that
differs from everything else i've seen out there, in that
i jump to the _start_ of the paragraph that contains the
footnote in it, rather than to the footnote-number itself.

i differ further in that full entire paragraph, and end-note,
are links, not just the number and the return-link symbol.
which means that i don't even need a return-link symbol.
(of course, the underline-decoration makes this too ugly,
but, as i said, i will be ditching that decoration right away.)

today's version, as opposed to yesterdays, has a smaller
default text-size _and_ a smaller width, which means that
the measure is about the same.   a lot of people, including
designers, say that smaller type looks "more professional".

on the other hand, readers would rather have a font-size
be _readable_ than have it "look professional", so there is
a good bit of natural tension between the two sides here...
as usual, i tend to stand with the readers.

***

sherwood said:

>    Table of contents could be easily handled with 

>    a pre-processor. FrameMaker had a neat feature 

>    where you could define certain paragraph styles 

>    as being   included in the ToC. So, for example, 

>    you could define H1, H2, and H3 as being ToC worthy 


i'm not sure what you're getting at here, sherwood,
so if you want to explain that, i would be interested.

in z.m.l. documents, the table of contents serves as a
belt-and-suspenders check against the actual contents,
where an _exact_ match means each confirms the other.

-bowerbird
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/markdown-discuss/attachments/20110610/85d50a09/attachment.html>