Thanks for the feedback, Alex.

> Am 09.10.2019 um 20:33 schrieb Alex Buckley <alex.buck...@oracle.com>:
> 
> On 10/9/2019 10:29 AM, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote:
> 
> People should remember that the search bar often contains overview 
> information of its own -- not on the top-level javadoc page, but on module 
> and class pages. Having that always visible is very useful on module and 
> class pages. It would be even more useful if the "SUMMARY:" part on a class 
> page had a "DESCRIPTION" link to get you back to the top, like the "SUMMARY:" 
> part on a module page has.
> 

I agree about the section links - I was considering linking directly to a class 
page instead of the overview page to make these links more visible (and also 
because class pages are what people presumably spend most time on).

I also agree there should be a DESCRIPTION or TOP link to go up to the top of 
the page. Very good points.


>> - Which version is best for navigating to an anchor within a page (e.g. 
>> member search or internal links)?
> 
> I think #2 has a serious problem. If you scroll, and then hit any key,
> then the search box grabs focus -- this is useful on the many occasions when 
> you want to search, but it means that keyboard shortcuts such as Ctrl-C are 
> pre-empted. Specifically, if I select text anywhere on the javadoc page with 
> the mouse, then press Ctrl-C, I see focus jump to the search box; if I then 
> switch to another program to paste in the copied text (to quote it in an 
> email, say), then I find the clipboard is empty, nothing was copied, Ctrl-C 
> was pre-empted. For this reason, I disregard #2.
> 

This shouldn’t really happen. Search should activate only on plain character 
keys, not Ctrl/Cmd keyboard shortcuts. I’ll try to reproduce the issue on 
Firefox/Windows. However, the whole focus grabbing is certainly a potential 
source of confusion/problems.

Hannes


>> - Do you experience any technical problems with your particular browser?
> 
> No, everything worked as you described. Firefox 60 on Windows 10.
> 
> Alex

Reply via email to