Oh. Ok. Tricky! -Phil.
> On Jul 6, 2018, at 8:00 AM, Sergey Bylokhov <sergey.bylok...@oracle.com> > wrote: > >> On 06/07/2018 01:13, Phil Race wrote: >> Actually .. I've found that Component.java uses a relative link for >> doc-files in all other cases. >> I think that you should actually just remove the usage of @docRoot to make >> it consistent. >> It is more logical for this case. > > In this method the "@docRoot" cannot be removed(it was added there > intentionally), because this method is overridden by some of our classes > where the relative link does not work. > >> -phil. >>> On 07/02/2018 10:16 AM, Phil Race wrote: >>> >>> OK, +1 >>> >>> -phil. >>> >>>> On 07/02/2018 10:09 AM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: >>>>> On 02/07/2018 09:29, Phil Race wrote: >>>>> Not exactly, it was after javadoc was changed under >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8195795 >>>> >>>> So modules are added to the path. >>>> >>>>> This one seems to be different than the other two .. no mention of the >>>>> module >>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8201611/webrev.00/src/java.desktop/share/classes/javax/imageio/metadata/IIOMetadataNode.java.udiff.html >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The html tag <a> was replaced by the direct javadoc link to the java class. >>>> >>>>> Why is it correct ? >>>>> >>>>> -phil. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On 07/02/2018 09:11 AM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: >>>>>> Hello. >>>>>> Please review the fix for jdk11. >>>>>> >>>>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8201611 >>>>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8201611/webrev.00 >>>>>> >>>>>> Some links in the javadoc became broken after modules were added. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> > > > -- > Best regards, Sergey.
