On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 17:15 +0200, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > Le 17 juin 05, à 17:08, Upayavira a écrit : > > > ...a document detailing how the HTMLGenerator works, with all of its > > options, wouldn't be that useful in other parts of the documentation > > (other than as a link), IMO. > > IMHO such reference documents should have permanent and predictable > short URLs, say "reference/components/HTMLGenerator" in this case. > That's hoping these will be generated automatically of course, at some > point.
Depends a bit on what is part of the automatically-generated docs. IMHO documentation that provides usage notes on components (thus, which is not really javadoc) should better not be maintained as javadoc. For example, take the I18nTransformer. There's a very very long javadoc there which is essentially user documentation and is very hard to read/maintain in the form of javadoc. I am +1 though on merging technical information on the component (such a it is cacheable, is it poolable, ...) automatically from the sources. -- Bruno Dumon http://outerthought.org/ Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
