You *say* it would be pretty simple... I've spent a few hours trying to figure out how to get event declarations in the components to show up in the reference guide, and I think I'll need a few more hours before it will work. Given we parse the event declarations and we already show ORL event declarations in the ref guide, *this* should be pretty simple too.
:-) jim On Mar 13, 2006, at 3:35 PM, John Sundman wrote: > I don't think we need a doctools person, at least not to implement > the > current regime. We just need a few tweaks here and there. > > If we were to move over to pure docbook and generalize the tools for > community use, why yes, then we could use some more dedicated tools > help. > However, what I'm suggesting should be pretty simple, I think, and it > would prevent the case, which we have seen from time to time, when new > tags get into the language and don't have any documentation at all. > Sometimes I myself haven't known they existed. If the tools checked, > then at least we would be guaranteed that the minimal docs would be > there, and I could flesh them out as time permitted. > > jrs > > On Mar 13, 2006, at 5:25 PM, P T Withington wrote: > >> If wishes were horses, Jim would hire you a doc tool person. :P >> >> On 2006-03-13 17:10 EST, John Sundman wrote: >> >>> I wish the tools would enforce the discipline that you can't add >>> a new >>> tag to the schema without creating a wrapper page for the docs. >>> >>> jrs >>> >>> On Mar 13, 2006, at 4:24 PM, P T Withington wrote: >>> >>>> Did it ever complain on undoc-ed params? I think not, because >>>> there >>>> are some 'hidden' params that we didn't want to doc. It does >>>> complain if you doc a param that does not exist. >>>> >>>> On 2006-03-13 16:14 EST, Max Carlson wrote: >>>> >>>>> Sorry - meant to reply all before... >>>>> >>>>> I now get a warning when method documentation is missing entirely, >>>>> but >>>>> not when method signatures don't match the comment... To >>>>> reproduce, try >>>>> deleting one of the arguments in a method comment and the build >>>>> should >>>>> still run successfully. >>>>> >>>>> -Max >>>>> >>>>> P T Withington wrote: >>>>>> Change 40495 by [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 2006/03/13 05:38:17 *pending* >>>>>> >>>>>> Summary: Integrate 39317 and parse-tree printer from legals >>>>>> Technical Reviewer: max (pending) >>>>>> QA Reviewer: frisco (pending) >>>>>> Doc Reviewer: jsundman (pending) >>>>>> Details: Makes doc errors work again >>>>>> Tests: Got a readable error for cssColorToLong: >>>>>> [exec] "views/LzDrawView.as":541:1: >>>>>> org.python.proxies.__main__$DocumentationError$0: >>>>>> LzDrawView.cssColorToLong: missing documentation >>>>>> >>>>>> Affected files ... >>>>>> >>>>>> ... //depot/lps-dev/WEB-INF/lps/server/sc/jsdoc2xml.py#5 >>>>>> integrate >>>>>> ... >>>>> //depot/lps-dev/WEB-INF/lps/server/src/org/openlaszlo/sc/ >>>>> Compiler.java#6 >>>>> edit >>>>>> ... >>>>> //depot/lps-dev/WEB-INF/lps/server/src/org/openlaszlo/sc/ >>>>> CompilerError.java#1 >>>>> integrate >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Max Carlson >>>>> OpenLaszlo.org >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Laszlo-dev mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Laszlo-dev mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Laszlo-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev >> > > _______________________________________________ > Laszlo-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev _______________________________________________ Laszlo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev
