Paul,
Generally speaking, you can translate "profiles" in JDK 8 documentation
into "modules" for JDK 9 documentation.
And, I think you can assume that the default will be for javadoc to only
generate docs for exported packages, just as the default is to generate
docs for public/protected types, constructors and members today. Yes,
you'll be able to override the default, but when you're generating the
API documentation for the users/consumers of a module, I would not
expect non-exported packages to be present.
In addition, there is some amount of discussion of the future role of
the frames on the left hand side. Given the availability of the new
Search feature in JDK 9, the utility of the indices on the left hand
side is significantly diminished. For example, if you want to see the
packages available in a module, you should be able to search for the
module name, bring up the module summary page, and see which packages
have been exported (always) and which are not exported (if that info was
requested when the docs were generated.)
-- Jon
On 05/16/2016 09:48 AM, Paul Benedict wrote:
Jon, I actually think the precedent set is the "All Classes" and "All
Profiles" toggle link in the overview-frame.html (upper-left frame)
[1]. When "All Profiles" is clicked and then a profile, you get an
additional option of "All Packages" ... so you could potentially add a
fourth just for "Exported Packages"
PS: But I don't want to go through so many clicks :-) Having the
option listed immediately is preferable for my taste.
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/
Cheers,
Paul
On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Jonathan Gibbons
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I guess there's two aspects to this discussion:
1. The packages listed in the summary page for a module.
For this, my expectation is that it may be more significant than
just a CSS style.
For example, one possibility is that the packages could be listed
in a table with different "tabs" for exported/non-exported
packages, similar to the "table with tabs" used to show different
subsets of methods, such as here:
http://download.java.net/java/jdk9/docs/api/java/lang/Object.html
2. Other appearances of a package name.
Here, we would have to list the various places where a package
name could appear, and decide which if any should be subject to
special CSS styling. It has been instructive in the design to
look at the relationship between types and packages to find a
precedent for the relationship between packages and modules. For
example, I note there is no special styling for package-private
types compared to public types.
-- Jon
On 05/16/2016 09:20 AM, Paul Benedict wrote:
Okay. Well, if it hasn't been planned, I definitely would like to
make a feature request. Specifically, a CSS style for exported
vs. nonexported packages so they can be stylized differently.
Cheers,
Paul
On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Jonathan Gibbons
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 05/16/2016 07:52 AM, Paul Benedict wrote:
I was wondering if JavaDoc in JDK 9 provides any visual
indicator (color, format, textual output, or otherwise)
to indicate exported packages vs non-exported packages?
Cheers,
Paul
javadoc is still a work in progress, and somewhat late to the
module game.
By default, javadoc should only show exported packages for a
module, the same way by default it only shows public and
protected constructors and members for a class, but it should
be able to show all packages, just as it can show all
constructors and members.
-- Jon
