How hard would it be to support adding the attributes and nested elements defined by parent classes? I'm thinking here in particular of all the tasks that are subclasses of MatchingTask. It would be nice if the documentation could be complete for these, indicating all allowed attributes and child elements for every task.
If that is too hard, at least a link to a documentation page for the superclass's elements and attributes would be helpful.
It wouldn't be hard to support MatchingTask elements. In fact, there is a special case in there for MatchingTask to *not* go there by choice. Look at our Appendix E document and you'll see what I mean. Rather than that document being 60 pages it probably would have been double that if for MatchingTask all the selectors, etc were documented with each task.
Whether we should do the same thing with this documentation is debatable, but I think maybe it should still remain a special case and link to documentation specifically for its parent. I'm not sure though.
Either way, it should be easy to support whatever decision is made.
As for superclass linking.... thats not quite going to work though. A superclass might not actually be a task, and if it is it might not be a task that can be used directly.
Erik
