Hi Greg, >> - hello-world.xml >... >I removed the reference to the convenience main() method, since this approach is no longer used as pervasively as it used to be. Ok, so probably also in the doc the references to main() should be removed too (or changing a little the paragraph to explaining that in code those part has been removed because ...), right ?
>> - hello-bxml >> Is there a way to write in page a title when bxml files are shown (for >> example for hello.bxml and hello_javascript.bxml) ? > >In these cases, I think that the name of the file isn't all that relevant - the content of the example is what is important. Yes, but could be useful to simplify users that want to read a tutorial and make experiments with code in the same time, so reading the file name of bxml files could be useful to know what to open directly in the IDE, all here ... >> - stock-tracker.ui.xml >> References to "@" symbols are still valid ? > >Yes - that's how we convert attribute values to URLs that are relative to the current document. Ok, I was confused by the removing of relative path in other places (now "/" is mandatory in some places), and maybe some reference to it (but in other parts of tutorials) should be updated (but probably this is already Ok). >> - stock-tracker.events.xml >> The isn't a sample to explain how to link Actions from inside BXML files. > >That's OK - it is covered in another tutorial. Ok, but what do you think to put a line of text there to say something like "this is covered in the ... Tutorial" (even without an hyperlink, but just as an info). >> And a last question, not related to documentation: >> in many samples I've seen that if we'd have an abstract class >> (implementing Application, and with a default implementation of all >> their methods) containing some common stuff (like a bindable Window, >> and some commonly-used global variables like BXMLSerializer, >> JSONSerializer, Resources, Locale, etc ...) maybe we could simplify >> some tutorials and demos ... what do you think ? Or maybe if not for >> Pivot itself, for one it its extensions ? > >Are you suggesting that we create a common default implementation of the Application interface that we can use throughout the tutorial? Yes, and maybe not only in tutorials ... >At this point, that probably isn't necessary, since most of the tutorials have been updated to use ScriptApplication as a launcher. Ok, but could be useful when (for many reasons) the launcher is not ScriptApplication. Thank you very much (even for other fixes), Sandro -- View this message in context: http://apache-pivot-developers.417237.n3.nabble.com/Little-things-in-Pivot-tutorials-tp1958043p1966286.html Sent from the Apache Pivot - Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
