IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: > Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > >> why does it has to be called "manual"? >> shouldn't this "manual" path be (manually) settable via the -meta file? > >>> "manual" is a pretty clear, widely used term for "long-form written >>> documentation of a particular piece of project".. Why make it settable? >>> That just adds complexity for no advantage that I can see. > > whereas "doc" could mean anything from MD to word :-) > >> and what is offered by Pd if it was indeed called "manual"? >> i suggest to add all the libdirs to the docbrowser. >> (and introduce libdir versions...) > >>> I guess you haven't tried the Help Browser in recent Pd-extended builds, >>> this is implemented, and will be folded into pd-gui-rewrite/0.43 > > true i haven't tried it. that's why i'm asking. > i'm currently travelling and would rather not have to download PdX. > > so does it do anything special about the keyword "manual"? or will it > directly show all the libdir-directories in the help-browser, so a > package could ship with "docs" and "exemples" and even "beispiele" and > still be browseable from within the help-browser? > > this makes most sense to me, as it is surely most robust against the odd > developer... (i'd prefer a system that allows for oddities and still > provides a somewhat uniform user experience, rather than > imposing/enforcing so called "standards")
It just shows what's in the directory. But you highlight a good reason to have standardized names: internationalization. It would be pretty easy to have 'examples' and 'manual' translated in the Help Browser, even tho the folder is called 'examples' etc. on the file system. A lot of OS's are doing it like this these days for common folders like Desktop, Documents, etc. .hc _______________________________________________ GEM-dev mailing list GEM-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/gem-dev
