Formatting Improvements to Synopsis in README #220
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
First pass at new formatting for synopsis
Second pass. Everything has been addressed. Pending proof read.
Third pass for format updates to synopsis section.
|
Looks amazing. Thanks! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
resolves #219
I can't say this is perfect, but it's consistent. I used the "python console" technique for code blocks which I think is a good way to display both the code and the output.
In a few sections I added a few more examples to expose a bit more functionality. I wouldn't blame you if you don't love that considering it's a synopsis.
One area where I am not clear on the functionality is the overrides for verbs. It might be helpful to readers to have an example that demonstrates the changes.
After rereading the Description section I think it looks fine, although it does reference "see MODERN VS CLASSICAL INFLECTIONS" which doesn't appear to be on the page.
Cheers!