If there are no objections, I will commit the changes for the website since they are not really invasive and fulfill their purpose.
Has anyone an idea why http://uima.apache.org/d/textmarker-current/tools.textmarker.book.html is not accessible? Peter On 06.03.2013 15:03, Peter Klügl wrote: > On 06.03.2013 13:43, Peter Klügl wrote: >> On 05.03.2013 16:15, Marshall Schor wrote: >>> On 3/5/2013 5:25 AM, Peter Klügl wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> The vote passes with the following result: >>>> >>>> +1 Marshall Schor >>>> +1 Tommaso Teofili >>>> +1 Peter Klügl >>>> >>>> No other votes were received. >>>> >>>> Thanks to you all, and special thanks to Marshall for all the help >>>> and for >>>> investing so much time :-) >>>> >>>> I will proceed with the checklist: >>>> http://uima.apache.org/release.html#Releasing >>>> >>>> Are there any opinions on textmarker's web-presence, e.g., download >>>> and >>>> documentation? >>> Yes, it should have this :-) >>> >>> I suggest the documentation go on the website under >>> docs/d/textmarker-current/ >>> (we normally have the website accessible docs for the current >>> release, but >>> sometimes may need others). The pointers to this could be in >>> several places. >>> It should have at least the same presence as other "sandbox" items, >>> but given >>> its new-ness and the amount of "stuff" that it entails, it seems to >>> me it could >>> have somewhat more prominence. >> >> I added a short text to the sandbox components, which points to the >> new page and to other locations, but the documentation is not >> available. Did I miss something? Do I need to do something in order >> to publish the /d/ stuff? >> >> About the link: If it is OK, then I am so bold and will include a >> link between "Addons and Sandbox" and "External Resources" in the >> left navigation menu. >> >> >>> The download: The download page, because of repetitive complexity, is a >>> combination of normal web markup plus generated things. The >>> generated things >>> come from specs in the file xdocs/stylesheets/project.xml >>> >>> It looks like a bit of redesign is warranted to support TextMarker >>> and the >>> pending release of individual add-ons. >>> >>> I suggest another "box" for these, which looks like the existing one >>> but has 1 >>> more column - the release date (in the other "boxes", the release >>> date was put >>> in the title above the box, but that kind of breaks down when the >>> rows in the >>> box all might have different release dates). >>> >>> Let me know if you need help with doing this. >> >> I will take a look at it now :-) > > Hmm.. I am not sure about the best way to design or implement it. > > Nevertheless, I prepared something. It's not very nice and I am > abusing the version parameter. The xml elements have additional > attributes and the script adds the html elements dependent on their > existence. For textmarker, there is now not a table for a release > version, but for all versions of the component. > > Here's the download page: > http://people.apache.org/~pkluegl/site/downloads.html > ... and the main site with the textmarker link: > http://people.apache.org/~pkluegl/site/ > > If the solution is OK for now, then I would extend the news and send > an announce mail. > > Peter > > >> >> Peter >> >>> -Marshall >>>> >>>> Peter >>>>
