address comment

diff --git a/examples/step-16/doc/results.dox b/examples/step-16/doc/results.dox
index 31836288ad199b4c56903a5b501636ce18d2fd51..004d6d512a62c977e8102dd20bae7f91440608f5 100644 (file)
--- a/examples/step-16/doc/results.dox
+++ b/examples/step-16/doc/results.dox
@@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ it shows the power of multigrid methods.
 
 
 We encourage you to generate timings for the solve() call and compare to
-step 6. You will see that the multigrid method has quite an overhead
+step-6. You will see that the multigrid method has quite an overhead
 on coarse meshes, but that it always beats other methods on fine
 meshes because of its optimal complexity.
 

diff --git a/examples/step-16b/doc/intro.dox b/examples/step-16b/doc/intro.dox
index 5e4375c42a53f9ff8f0e483d8a5d0dd73d698926..9bddddddc633d645c862d5a688b5b092dba9aa28 100644 (file)
--- a/examples/step-16b/doc/intro.dox
+++ b/examples/step-16b/doc/intro.dox
@@ -7,6 +7,9 @@ This is a variant of step-16 with the only change that we are using the
 MeshWorker framework with the pre-made LocalIntegrator helper classes instead
 of manually assembling the matrices.
 
+The details of this framework on how it is used in practice will be explained
+as part of this tutorial program.
+
 <h3>The testcase</h3>
 
 The problem we solve here is the same as the one in step-16.