FWIW, one of the tools that will be coming from the ADF Faces side of things is a Maven 2 report that goes from our metadata to tagdocs that are a big improvement over the tlddoc generated docs. Tlddoc is pretty awful for JSF - every type is String, nothing is "request time", there's no list of facets or events, etc. The docs we will generate have a structure more like:
http://tinyurl.com/bkayl I say "will" because I tried rewriting the tool a couple of weeks ago using the AbstractMultiPageReport base class in Maven 2.0.2 and ended with conclusion that this bit of Maven 2 is currently completely broken. Grrrr.... -- Adam On 2/15/06, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I disagree with the removal of the usage section. The usage section > > shows how to use the component in context which is not always obvious. > > I don't see a problem with making it optional for trivial components, > > however. > > Yes well some usage sections are better then others. I took a look > again after reading your comment and some of those are decent. I > guess we can keep/port the existing ones for now. Perhaps we can > consider dropping again when we have the simple examples hosted on the > zone. The examples themselves show usage and the source code servlet > allows you to see the JSF. No sense maintaining two copies at that > point. > > > I'm also not thrilled with the removal of the syntax section, but I > > agree that the TLD docs could be a substitute. My preference would > > be to see the syntax section generated from the same source as the TLD > > docs, but I'm not volunteering to do the work at this time. :) > > I agree that the automatic generation would be excellent. I'm not > volunteering either. The TLD docs are done automatically and I bet if > we looked carefully we would see that many of the components are > already out of sync since its hard to keep the documentation up to > date. > > > At minimum, the link to the TLD section should point directly to the TLD > > document for the component in question rather than to the TLD index. > > I agree. That was what I was thinking. > > > Also, before the syntax section is removed, the TLD docs must be > > updated to contain the same information. That's not currently the > > case (I used dataList as a test of this theory). > > Good point. This could be done as each component is migrated to APT. > > > -Mike > > Sean >
