Hello Rod,
> This version of the table attempts to stipulate which section of the
> process the rule applies to.
A few comments about this patch. It applies cleanly, make html is ok.
It adds a summary table which shows for each case what happens. Although
the information can be guessed/infered from the text, I think that a
summary table is a good thing, at least because it breaks an otherwise
dense presentation.
I would suggest the following changes:
The table should be referenced from the description, something like "Table
xxx summarizes the ..."
ISTM that it would be clearer to split the Policy column into "FOR xxx
..." and "USING" or "WITH CHECK", and to merge the rows which have the
same "FOR xxx ..." contents, something like:
POLICY | ---------------+------------+----- | USING | ... FOR ALL ...
+------------+----- | WITH CHECK | ... ---------------+------------+----- FOR SELECT ... | USING
|...
So that it is clear that only ALL & UPDATE can get both USING & WITH
CHECK. This can be done with "morerows=1" on an entry so that it spans
more rows.
For empty cells, maybe a dash would be clearer. Not sure.
--
Fabien
