Re: Re: Please comment : New tutorial about DataGrid and DataObject

Hi Philipe, Thank you very much for reviewing my tutorial, and for these corrections. Indeed I meant "column". You're right about the <code></code> convention. The problem with the title is that's a bit long, that's why I removed "PEAR". But you're right, I'll see what I can do about this. I've been working a lot on the layout (code paragraphs with a grey background, etc..), and will put a new version online soon, your corrections included. -- og Philippe Jausions wrote: > Hi, > > In section III, you meant "we do not need to include a << column >> for > it" instead of "<< row >> for it". > > I would add a pair of <samp></samp>, <kbd></kdb> or > <code></code> tags > round the bind() method's name and other code-related inline text. > > You probably also should add "PEAR" somewhere in the title of the > document itself. > > Otherwise, it quite good and should be useful to a lot of people... > > -Philippe > > > Olivier Guilyardi wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I've just finished writing a first version of my "Structures_DataGrid and >> DB_DataObject tutorial", and would greatly appreciate that you review >> it : >> >> http://www.samalyse.com/code/pear/dgdo >> >> By "you", I mean "PEAR developers". This tutorial is focused at users >> and even >> newbies, but I consider that your point of view is important so that >> my tutorial >> doesn't induce such users/newbies into using bad practices. >> >> My mother-tongue is not english, so if you find mistakes or typos, >> I'll be happy >> to hear about them. >> >> Thanks >> >