Please remove my email from this list: achisleyw...@bellsouth.net
> On Jan 12, 2015, at 7:09 AM, Chip Orange <lists3...@comcast.net> wrote: > > I absolutely agree David, and I've asked for this before. GW at that time > told me to do a search on the contents of the app developers manual, for each > and every version number released! I thought that was an unbelievably poor > support answer, so I second this request. > > One thing that will help at times, is to look through all of the readme files > for each WE release. Changes to script commands are documented there, but I > have no idea how you go about getting older read.me files. > > The other info which should be included in this info should be apps they've > released which are meant for other app developers to use (starting with the > toolkit, going on to anything else which provides shared objects or methods > which have a minimum version of WE associated). > > If we had our wiki back, and if this couldn't make it into the official > documentation, it would be a nice example of an ever-growing sharable > document. > > Ok, I see everything but the kitchen sink is in this email, so I'll stop for > now; but yes, app developers could use a little support now and again. > > Chip > > > -----Original Message----- > From: David [mailto:trailerda...@hotmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2015 5:10 AM > To: gw-scripting@gwmicro.com > Subject: Minimum Version Required > > This might likely be for the staff, or anyone who wants to undertake the > job. :) > > Now, imagine you are developing a new app. You base the app's activity > on a set of instructions, given to you through the scripting environment > and the GWToolkit. As you build the app code, you may or may not, read > the individual chapters of the Developer's Reference. All you know, is > that the app runs nicely on your computer, which may have the newest > version of the screen reader installed. > > Later on, you may update the code of the app. Things may change in the > provided set of routines - like now that the new Browse Mode is being > introduced. And, I could likely come up with a few more cases, where > your app would base its activity on certain routines, that will require > a minimum version of the screen reader, before it will run smoothly. > > True enough, if you are good and sit half a day with the reference > manual, tiredlessly looking up each and every instruction call of your > app, you may be able to determine if any of the thousand of calls you > make, would have a restriction tied to it. But sorry for asking, how > many of you driven developers do ever do that? :) > > My idea here, would be if we could please have a table all gathered and > provided, which would hold all the instructions that have a minimum > requirement tied to it. The table should hold the instruction, and the > version number for its minimum. And, it should be quick to find, like > directly from the root-level of the chapter list in the reference > manual. I then could simply bring out that table, and quickly check if > the instruction I am going to base my next activity on, would have any > minimum restriction. At least I, would find that far more simple and > quick, than having to look up numerous chapters, and jump in and out of > the reading window, search box and so forth, in the chm window. If we > could have it all collected on one and same page, I would only have to > work that one page in my restriction hunting. > > Hope this idea makes sense, and that we could have such a list provided. > I guess, it should not be too much for the staff to collect the list, > based on the raw text of the chm file. Otherwise, the only way I could > think of, is that someone had undertaken the grand job of scrolling all > the chapters of the manual, looking out for the minimum requirement. So > staff members, would you be willing to provide us such a quick-list? > > Thanks, > > -- > David >
