I personally like the APT format. However +1 on both formats (the author chooses)
--Manfred On 12/15/07, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +1 on apt > -1 on xdoc > > APT is *much* easier to write. > > Why do we have to choose one? As long as the author is writing > documentation, we should be happy right? > > -Andrew > > On Dec 15, 2007 7:35 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -1 on APT > > +1 on XML > > > > > > On Dec 15, 2007 3:29 PM, Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > > > I'm experimenting with some changes to the myfaces site. > > > > > > I see that there are some files in maven APT format, and some in XDOC. > > > Which is the preferred format for files? > > > > > > In particular, I'd like to split docs into versions that explicitly talk > > > about either JSF11 or JSF12. Which format should I write the new files in? > > > > > > Personally, I'm currently neutral. XML can be a pain sometimes, and is > > > less readable in raw form. However xdoc is a standard while APT is > > > maven-specific. > > > > > > Opinions? > > > > > > Regards, Simon > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > further stuff: > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
