In-Reply-To: <22098.1092097259@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <6B84FBA0-EA28-11D8-A672-000D9366F0C4@torgo.978.org>
	<19661.1092083983@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<200408092320.33165.peter_e@gmx.net>
	<20040809212737.GA3515@fetter.org> <20528.1092087296@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<20040809214010.GC3515@fetter.org> <22098.1092097259@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v618)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Message-Id: <0EB06A3F-EAD6-11D8-86DE-000393D1F76E@torgo.978.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: David Fetter <david@fetter.org>,
	Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
From: Jeff <threshar@torgo.978.org>
Subject: Re: Suggestion on reorganizing functions 
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 10:03:29 -0400
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>


On Aug 9, 2004, at 8:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

> David Fetter <david@fetter.org> writes:
>> I think Jeff's original point was that he wanted some kind of index
>> for all functions, not just ones you already know how to classify.
>
> I thought his point was that he didn't fully know how the docs have
> already classified functions, and therefore didn't know which page to
> look on to find a given one.  This seems a legitimate gripe to me, and
> one that can be cured with a more complete index.
>

Exactly.

or if you are trying to remember a function - say "Oh whats that thing? 
Colace? Coerce? [scrolls] Ahh! Coalesce!"

The trouble seems to be getting that list automatically generated from 
the existing SGML.

--
Jeff Trout <jeff@jefftrout.com>
http://www.jefftrout.com/
http://www.stuarthamm.net/