On 04/21/2016 09:32 AM, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Thu, 2016-04-21 at 08:04 -0400, John Ferlan wrote: >> Add bolding for <dt> elements to make them "stick out" on the page rather >> that just a stream of text where the <dt> elements only differ by slightly >> different font style since most uses encase the text within using <code> >> >> Signed-off-by: John Ferlan <jferlan@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> >> I had suggested this during a review of Andrea's changes late last month: >> >> http://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2016-March/msg01501.html >> >> but figure I'll make the more 'formal' patch request... > > Yeah, sorry about that. I just forgot :( > I figured... no big deal. >> docs/generic.css | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/docs/generic.css b/docs/generic.css >> index 208e31e..b86bb88 100644 >> --- a/docs/generic.css >> +++ b/docs/generic.css >> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ ul, ol { >> dt { >> margin-left: 1em; >> margin-right: 2em; >> + font-weight: bold; >> } >> >> dl dd { > > This styling is appropriate when the content of <dt> is a > <code> element, because that makes the font smaller. > > This is the case for most of the <dt>s in our documentation, > but not *all* of them. I've just posted a patch[1] that fixes > a bunch of <dt>s that were missing the inner <code> element, > but that still leaves out a few that are just not supposed to > have it - look no further than contact.html for an example. > > So my proposal is, apply my patch first, and then add > > dt code { > font-weight: bold; > } > > to the stylesheet instead. > > Sounds good? I saw your series - been a VERY BUSY day on libvir-list... In any case wouldn't that make *all* <code> elements bolded - there's a lot more of those and then the <dt> bolding wouldn't stand out John > > > [1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2016-April/msg01476.html > -- > Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization Team > -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list