[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-14910?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17116846#comment-17116846
]
David Jencks commented on CAMEL-14910:
--------------------------------------
This nav list is generated. I was hoping to generate it in Antora with the
index extension that generates the summary tables, but the needed change didn't
get into Antora 2.3.1.
One way to provide the information necessary to generate the nested list would
be to put the nesting depth in the page as an attribute: normally depth 1 but
for the pages in a summary depth 2. It would be best if this could be
calculated as the attributes are being inserted, but I haven't thought of a way
to do that.
Does anyone else have an idea how to provide the information needed to
calculate the nesting?
> Decide if component summary pages are a good idea
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CAMEL-14910
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-14910
> Project: Camel
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: website
> Affects Versions: 3.2.0
> Reporter: David Jencks
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: aws2.png, getting-started.png
>
>
> I discovered some component summary pages while working on CAMEL-14874
> and included them in the nav pane and index table. Claus suggested that the
> Spring one was useful and the others should be dropped. The Kubernetes
> summary page is heavily linked back and forth to the individual Kubernetes
> components.
>
> In general, due to the extremely long components list, I'm inclined to think
> that any possible kind of grouping is a good idea. If there are going to be
> summary pages, then they should all be similar in some way.
> * Should there be summary pages for groups of related components?
> * What should their structure and appearance be?
> * Should the nav pane indent the components in a group?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
