From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Dunsmore Subject: Re: Re: Worg needs some reorganizing Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 10:55:10 -0600 Message-ID: <87vd1mgnip.fsf@riotblast.dunsmor.com> References: <4CAD81B0.6090807@manor-farm.org> <87pqveyct2.fsf@gmail.com> <87ocayl81d.fsf@manor-farm.org> <0E084C6C-6FD1-4C74-BD9F-34F2830B93C5@gmail.com> <87bp6ytacd.fsf_-_@stats.ox.ac.uk> <87fwsubckf.fsf@gnu.org> <87aaj2w5x4.fsf@fastmail.fm> <87d3nyuhkw.fsf@altern.org> <87aaj0kggo.fsf@gmail.com> <87zkr0load.fsf@riotblast.dunsmor.com> <87pqrwipjd.fsf@gmail.com> <87oc7glhef.fsf@riotblast.dunsmor.com> <87hbd8ins8.fsf@gmail.com> <87ipxolgji.fsf@riotblast.dunsmor.com> <87aaj0iiff.fsf@gmail.com> <87r5cbk28p.fsf@riotblast.dunsmor.com> <87fwsrtokh.fsf@gnu.org> <87fwsrjtnx.fsf@riotblast.dunsmor.com> <87hbd7jr42.fsf@gmail.com> <87k4i2fa7l.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=50177 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PfErT-0004Oa-Ft for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 11:58:27 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PfEps-0001KK-7Q for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 11:56:51 -0500 Received: from deathroller.dunsmor.com ([98.129.169.48]:53430) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PfEps-0001KD-2Q for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 11:55:12 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87k4i2fa7l.fsf@gmail.com> (Eric Schulte's message of "Tue, 18 Jan 2011 09:13:12 -0700") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Eric Schulte Cc: Dan Davison , Ian Barton , Jason Dunsmore , Bastien , Matt Lundin , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org, Carsten Dominik "Eric Schulte" writes: >>> >>> By the way, having the javascript section-folding enabled on only some >>> pages is confusing and doesn't make for the best browsing experience. >>> Now that the TOC will be collapsed by default, perhaps it's no longer >>> needed? >>> >> >> Yes the javascript is probably the culprit here, I agree that with the >> hidden TOC it is probably not required. My preference would be to >> remove the section folding (and use of javascript) from Worg entirely. >> > > Is there a consensus on removing Javascript folding from *all* pages on > Worg. I think this would be an improvement both for the readability and > stylistic coherence of the site. I am in favor of removing the javascript folding from all Worg pages. It would improve the consistency and experience of browsing Worg.