[postgis-devel] Issue 35 in postgis: Comments on Postgis Functions

[Obe, Regina]

Yes that is what I was thinking.  Although I think we only need one definition in the docs.  Not sure the easiest way to do that.

________________________________

From: postgis-devel-bounces at postgis.refractions.net on behalf of Kevin Neufeld
Sent: Sun 7/6/2008 11:51 AM
To: PostGIS Development Discussion
Subject: Re: [postgis-devel] Issue 35 in postgis: Comments on Postgis Functions



You mean having one doc entry for every overridden function definition? 
No problem here.  I too think it would clarify things for users.
-- Kevin

Obe, Regina wrote:
>
> ...
> Does anyone have issues with me changing the doc accordingly.
> 
> Thanks,
> Regina
_______________________________________________
postgis-devel mailing list
postgis-devel at postgis.refractions.net
http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel




-----------------------------------------
The substance of this message, including any attachments, may be
confidential, legally privileged and/or exempt from disclosure
pursuant to Massachusetts law. It is intended
solely for the addressee. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-devel/attachments/20080707/f6c3d774/attachment.html>