Am 05.10.2015 um 17:18 schrieb sebb:
On 4 October 2015 at 15:48, Felix Schumacher
<felix.schumac...@internetallee.de> wrote:
Hi all,
I have spend a lot of time lately going through the docs for jmeter and
especially looking at the markup side of the documentation.
For which many thanks.
I have noticed a few things, that could be (hopefully) improved.
Code examples
---------------------
The code examples are all treated as plain text. There is no further markup
to differentiate a shell script from an xml fragment or a java source code
example.
Maybe we could use a javascript library like
https://github.com/google/code-prettify? We would have to add an language
attribute to each of our source code examples and extend the style sheets.
OK, so long as the JS library has a compatible license.
Layout of Menu-paths and key combos
---------------------------------------------------
Paths through menu like structures and combination of keys are text only. I
propose to add markup (like in docbook) for this.
Not sure I know what that means.
You can see an example at
http://people.apache.org/~fschumacher/jmeter/usermanual/doc-writers.html
And by the way, do you think such a page would be useful? And if so,
where should it be located?
Notes
--------
Notes can be used for different use cases like warnings or infos. I think it
would be nice to have an attribute on those notes to make them
distinguishable. The style of the note could reflect that attribute.
OK
Icons with fonts
---------------------
Fonts like https://fortawesome.github.io/Font-Awesome/ provide nice looking
symbols, that scale well. Should we include such a font and use the symbols
for notes, bugs, ...? Would it be a problem, if the font had a non apache
license?
Potentially, yes it might be a problem.
Raise a LEGAL JIRA with specific proposals.
Will try to.
PDF files
-----------
There are a few pdf files linked on the web page. Should we convert them to
xml? I don't think we would really loose anything. On the other hand the
xml->html files would be better searchable by search sites. We could link
to the original pdf files, if we want to keep them.
There should be editable sources for the PDF files, e.g. in ODF format.
No need to convert to XML (which would likely be much harder to maintain).
It is not the editable source I am after. I think it is nicer to read on
browsers, that have no pdf reader embedded.
The documents seem to be pretty standard layout, so they should not
loose anything when converted to standard doc html. The maintainance is
a point, but a minor one in my eyes.
Usage of the different style sheets
----------------------------------------------
The web page and the "printable" pages are generated by different style
sheets. As far as I can see, the "printable" pages are used by jmeter's
internal doc system. Is there any other usage for those pages?
Yes, they are used for off-line documentation.
We should not expect users to have to go online for the documentation.
I always looked at the documentation in the docs folder. If the
printable one is the preferred one, we should look at the colors at least.
If not, we could strip the number of generated "printable" files further,
since I haven't seen a way to show any page except the
usermanual/component_reference and usermanual/functions pages.
We need to keep offline docs.
That's right. I think offline docs are really useful.
The web pages should be printable with the latest additions in trunk (at
least on firefox and chrome).
The website pages have menus that are not useful for offline browsing.
For me the question is, do they hurt so much, that we have to maintain
two versions of the docs?
Regards,
Felix
What do you think?
Regards,
Felix
