I think we don't need to decide one way or the other right now. We need simple html docs for sure. I think having the docs as an RIA as pretty cool as well.
For example, AngularJS docs is available as mostly static content here: https://docs.angularjs.org/api For this kind of doc, we just need simple XSLT on the generated asdocs. Although, there is a nice integration for runtime errors. When you run into framework exceptions, AngularJS throws this kind of line in the console with an url: https://s.apache.org/angular_error (shortened it, because this is a big error) When you actually go to the link, the error is explained and possible fixes are provided. That is a pretty cool feature. I dont think we can do this kind of stuff with simple static HTML docs. Thanks, Om On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > On 12/16/16, 1:51 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote: > > > >What do I have to do to get the XML files? I’ll have a look at what I > >find. > > In flex-falcon/compiler-jx there is a > org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.ASDOCJSC.java > It works just like MXMLC and COMPC. If you specify > -js-output-type=FLEXJS_DITA you will get XML, but I'm sure it is buggy and > not complete. > > I'm not an expert on this stuff at all, but apparently, DITA is some sort > of known pattern of use for XML, and at least Flash Builder and maybe > other IDEs understand it, and if you pack DITA files in a SWC, Flash > Builder will show it in code assist somehow. I haven't tried it, but that > was the only reason I even started on xml output. > > However, if you look at the DITA files generated by the regular Flex SDK, > you'll see there is one per package. Right now I think ASDOCJSC is > outputting one per class since that was easiest given that each class is > compiled in its own thread. > > I'm not sure when I'd get back to working on the DITA files so someone > else is definitely welcome to push this forward. > > HTH, > -Alex > >
