Yeah, of course that is true if the fields are non-public and javadoc is not instructed to include them, but that goes without saying. However some people do use -protected, -private & -package as they are supported by the javadoc tool. Defaults are often changed.
I have worked at companies who really go to town with their Javadocs and use the -private option as well linking to source code (for internal use). The intent is to gather as much auto-generated information as possible in one place in a fairly well known and useable structure. Of course in that case, the consumer could just look at the linked source, but I expect you get my point. Javadoc supports documenting private fields, but even if it didn't, there is no guarantee that the fields will be private in any case, regardless of whether or not it is good design/best practice/a capital offence to make them private. On 8 August 2011 21:27, Greg Brown <gk_br...@verizon.net> wrote: > What I mean is that private fields aren't included in Javadoc by default, so > in general you won't see the field at all, never mind the fact that it is > annotated with @BXML. > > It's not *harmful* to add @Documented to @BXML - I just don't think it's > going to have much effect, that's all. > > G > > On Aug 8, 2011, at 10:18 AM, Chris Bartlett wrote: > >> Choosing not to include it in Javadocs it is fine if we are certain >> that it is of no value, or is detrimental in some way. I don't see >> how it it would be detrimental, and it might be useful to some people, >> so I would prefer to include it. >> >> Or let me put it this way - if annotations were *included* in Javadocs >> by default (as opposed to being *excluded* by default), I wouldn't be >> able to suggest a good reason to *exclude* the @BXML annotation. >> >> On 8 August 2011 21:07, Greg Brown <gk_br...@verizon.net> wrote: >>>> I'm not saying that it would help to enhance the Pivot API Javadocs in >>>> any way. Just that it would be there for Pivot consumers when they >>>> generate Javadocs for their own code that uses @BXML. >>> >>> @BXML is primarily meant for application, not platform, usage anyways, so >>> that's OK. I'm just wondering about the overall utility of adding the >>> @Documented annotation to it, since most of the time your @BXML-annotated >>> fields are going to be private, and (I'd guess that) most Javadoc does not >>> include private members. >>> >>> > >
