To: Roberto Mello <rmello@cc.usu.edu>
cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, lockhart@fourpalms.org,
	Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii@sra.co.jp>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org,
	pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Re: [HACKERS] Re: 7.1 docs 
In-reply-to: <20010325092310.A8329@cc.usu.edu> 
References: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0103241339310.2319-100000@peter.localdomain>
	<22991.985451522@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20010325092310.A8329@cc.usu.edu>
Comments: In-reply-to Roberto Mello <rmello@cc.usu.edu>
	message dated "Sun, 25 Mar 2001 09:23:10 -0700"
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 11:38:44 -0500
Message-ID: <11260.985538324@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

Roberto Mello <rmello@cc.usu.edu> writes:
> 	I like the way the Oracle functions are documented, except for the
> fact that they have one huge page for all functions, which is hard on
> those on slow connections reading docs online. 
> 	They have functions in tables grouped per functionality (e.g. character
> functions that returning character values, character functions returning
> number values) and with each function name (which is all that is in the
> table) is linked to a larger explanation of the function with the complete
> syntax and examples (usually two).

Yes, it'd be cool to have the User's Guide contain the existing function
tables with each entry hotlinked to a more extensive reference entry.
We could eliminate some of the nitty-gritty details from the User's
Guide that way, which I think is good.  I don't want to reduce the
function tables to just names a la Oracle --- I think the tables are
good as they are.  But there are places, such as in the discussion of
the pattern-match functions, where we have reference-page-like material
that doesn't fit very well in the U.G.

			regards, tom lane