Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- open_sauces_errata [2010-04-13 11:50] – 83.101.33.97
+++ open_sauces_errata [2010-04-14 01:22] – alkan
@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
   * <del>pp 55. include author name beneath title.</del>
+=== still waiting... ===
+  * check all logos
+  * check E numbers
+  * check chemical notation
+  * check footnotes
+  * check IPA for 'stump' and/or 'stampot'
+  * check capitalisation & italic of 'Miel beton'
+    * i think i checked this, so it should simply be as indicated in the final plain text versions.  --- //[[alkan.chipperfield@gmail.com|Alkan Chipperfield]] 2010/04/14 02:50//
+  * map for feral trade coffee -> double gold recipe
+  * check chinese in ginger soup recipe
+    * well, as i mentioned by email a while ago, there is nothing in the characters that suggests they //aren't// what they're meant to be…  --- //[[alkan.chipperfield@gmail.com|Alkan Chipperfield]] 2010/04/14 02:50//
+  * check urls for accurcy & consistency
+  * check footnote consistency
+=== misc ===
+poking my nose where it shouldn't be, but…
+  * i like the green chevrons, but i wonder if they work with the existing devices and designs
+  * speaking of this, something has bothered me a little about the stylised braces. perhaps they seem somewhat too imposing. i don't know how it would work, but i wonder if reducing their opacity would be an option… or changing their colour?
+  * because the the graphic behind the sourcing paragraph on (pdf) page 9 is not aligned to the text, on first glance it looked to me like the text was meant to be highlighted
+  * speaking of chevrons: even though in bernard's article they are 'references' and not 'links', they are serving the same function so why not put the little blue chevrons next to them like everywhere else?
+  * speaking of braces, the one on (pdf) page 22 overlaps the text in an unseemly fashion!