Mattias Flodin wrote:

...

(ii) Requiring all documentation to support a no-script option.

In think (ii) is an absolute requirement. I find myself using text-based browsers from time to time, especially when working across an SSH connection, and I get quite annoyed by some documentation sites that navigation exclusively though Javascript. I would hate for boost to go the same way.

In addition to some text browsers not supporting Javascript at all, the CERT has on numerous occasions advised that Javascript be disabled in browsers such as IE for security reasons, and some companies make that a policy decision.

Actually I agree with this. I will change the serialization navigation pain so that it works on browsers that don't support scripting. This would leave the navigation pane but it would always be maximally expanded for browsers that don't support it. I think that would fulfill the requirement of making the documentation universally useable and still permit us to use the facility we like most of the time. A real problem with this collapsible tree navigation is that I generated it by hand. OK for a one time deal but not a great long term idea. As I understand it - the boost.book idea is the long term solution. I don't know if it now has the capability to generate such a navigation pane from the source documentation - but it should. Also if the formatting were all in the cascaded style sheet it would go a long way to avoiding disputes about things like aesthetics. It would be practical as well. For example one using a text based browser might use a different CSS. Feel free to take this with a grain of salt because I've barely looked at it. Robert Ramey