Adding a bit more details to the mindmaps manual

[ghost]

There has been repeated confusion about the concept color on the Q & A sites. While everything is explained in the manual, I feel it might make sense to stress the distinction between child and node even more.

Version: 3.1.5

There is nothing wrong in the manual but the explanations on p. 721 are not too exhaustive. Instead of Here is an example of a tree built in this way: we could write

Let us now build a tree that way. Please note that we pass the concept color to the respective child and note to a node under it.

And in the code example one could add this information, too, since many users just look at the examples.

% preamble: \usetikzlibrary{mindmap}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\path[mindmap,concept color=black,text=white] node[concept] {Computer Science}
[clockwise from=0]
% note that `sibling angle' can only be defined in % `level 1 concept/.append style={}'
child[concept color=green!50!black] {
node[concept] {practical}
[clockwise from=90]
child { node[concept] {algorithms} }
child { node[concept] {data structures} }
child { node[concept] {pro\-gramming languages} } child { node[concept] {software engineer\-ing} }
}
child[concept color=blue] { % note that the concept color is passed to the child(!)
node[concept] {applied}
[clockwise from=-30]
child { node[concept] {databases} } child { node[concept] {WWW} }
}
child[concept color=red] { node[concept] {technical} } child[concept color=orange] { node[concept] {theoretical} };
\end{tikzpicture}

[hmenke]

Ha! I'd estimate that 90% of users on Q&A sites don't even know that the manual exists. Improving the manual is always just exercises in futility, but sure it can be done.

[hmenke]

@tallmarmot Is the note that @Mo-Gul committed in e6e91c4 sufficient? If yes, please close this and add the closed-fixed label.

[ghost]

@hmenke Looks great except that I had a typo "and note to a" which should be "and not to a", i.e. the "note" should be a "not". Clearly my bad but the typo propagated.