2018-03-02 13:13 GMT+01:00 Stefan Bodewig :
> > All I wanted to say, keeping things visually consistent helps
> > understanding. So, my simple set of rules is:
>
> >- is for attributes
> >- is for values
> >- is for shell variable names/property name/CLI options and
> input
> >
2018-03-02 13:13 GMT+01:00 Stefan Bodewig :
> On 2018-03-02, Gintautas Grigelionis wrote:
>
> > 2018-03-02 9:54 GMT+01:00 Stefan Bodewig :
>
> >> On 2018-03-01, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 7:28 AM, Gintautas Grigelionis <
> g.grigelio...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I
On 2018-03-02, Gintautas Grigelionis wrote:
> 2018-03-02 9:54 GMT+01:00 Stefan Bodewig :
>> On 2018-03-01, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 7:28 AM, Gintautas Grigelionis <
g.grigelio...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I tried then to use the replacement tags as consistently as
>>
2018-03-02 9:54 GMT+01:00 Stefan Bodewig :
> On 2018-03-01, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>
> >> On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 7:28 AM, Gintautas Grigelionis <
> >> g.grigelio...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> I tried then to use the replacement tags as consistently as possible in
> >>> such a large body of text, but
On 2018-03-01, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 7:28 AM, Gintautas Grigelionis <
>> g.grigelio...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I tried then to use the replacement tags as consistently as possible in
>>> such a large body of text, but I realised that we perhaps need a kind of a
>>> style g
2018-03-02 7:44 GMT+01:00 Jan Matèrne (jhm) :
> > > > > I made an attempt to convert the manual to HTML 5, the rationale
> > > > being
> > > > > that HTML 5 deprecates tt tag and recommends to replace it with
> > > > > tags like code, kbd, samp and var, which could be used in a more
> > > > consis
2018-03-01 10:43 GMT+01:00 Jan Matèrne (jhm) :
> > > I made an attempt to convert the manual to HTML 5, the rationale
> > being
> > > that HTML 5 deprecates tt tag and recommends to replace it with tags
> > > like code, kbd, samp and var, which could be used in a more
> > consistent
> > > way to a
On 2018-03-01, Dominique Devienne wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 7:28 AM, Gintautas Grigelionis <
> g.grigelio...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I tried then to use the replacement tags as consistently as possible in
>> such a large body of text, but I realised that we perhaps need a kind of a
>> style gu
On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 7:28 AM, Gintautas Grigelionis <
g.grigelio...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I made an attempt to convert the manual to HTML 5, the rationale being that
> HTML 5 deprecates tt tag and recommends to replace it with tags like code,
> kbd, samp and var, which could be used in a more cons
On 2016-07-01, John Argentieri wrote:
> This page has a note which I think may be causing some confusion. Is
> the javac "debug" tag for ant really supposed to be "off"/"true"? or
> is it really supposed to be "on"/"off"? If so, the last sentence is
> incorrect...:
Ant understand true/yes/on and
Matt Benson wrote:
You can also read about the gendoc sandbox Antlib at
http://ant.apache.org/antlibs/sandbox.html . For some
reason this has been in the sandbox over 2.5 years. I
don't know where the time has gone...
we use this @work to generate docs for libraries other than Ant
itself...
You can also read about the gendoc sandbox Antlib at
http://ant.apache.org/antlibs/sandbox.html . For some
reason this has been in the sandbox over 2.5 years. I
don't know where the time has gone...
-Matt
--- Tony Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the response. :)
>
>
Hi,
Thanks for the response. :)
One quick thought…
Kevin Jackson wrote:
> The docbook route for ant has been discussed a few times previously, I
> even got the first part of the manual converted to pdf via saxen+fop,
> but the discussion has revolved around a way of making the
> documentation
Hi,
> I've noticed that many newcomers are offered unit testing and
> documentation as good places to start. This works out for me, because
> I'm a huge believer in good documentation.
>
> If I'm browsing the repository correctly, it looks like the manual is
> written in HTML. I think it would b
Steve Loughran wrote:
Peter Reilly wrote:
Steve Loughran wrote:
Not unless we move to Java1.5 attributes :)
This may be a while
I know. I wasnt expecting any pick up there. Not until Jikes adds the
support for parsing them, then we could say
"ant runs on any platform, but you need jikes or j
Peter Reilly wrote:
Steve Loughran wrote:
Not unless we move to Java1.5 attributes :)
This may be a while
I know. I wasnt expecting any pick up there. Not until Jikes adds the
support for parsing them, then we could say
"ant runs on any platform, but you need jikes or javac 1.5+ to compile",
On Wed, 09 Mar 2005, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I hear that going via TeX gives you the best typesetting.
Absolutely!
And I'll stop here or I'll start moaning about people forcing me to
use Word (fortunately the Office for X version) to create docs that
look so much worse than t
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >> The problem with IntrospectionHelper vs. source code based is that
> >> don't know which attributes are required/mutall
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> The problem with IntrospectionHelper vs. source code based is that
>> don't know which attributes are required/mutally exclusive whatever
>> via IH.
>
> Yes and no Stefan. IH is
> -Original Message-
> From: Dominique Devienne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> What I currently have
Something else I have, which we coded with a co-worker here,
is JavaScript code (that works in IE and FireFox, even though
the FireFox's sort() is not stable) which allows to sort HTML
tables
Steve Loughran wrote:
Not unless we move to Java1.5 attributes :)
This may be a while
Peter
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--- Peter Reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This looks like a really cool method.
Agreed; I have been following this discussion and had
hoped that (especially with its latest additions) we
could utilize
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > --- Peter Reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> This looks like a really cool method.
> >
> > Agreed; I have been following this discussion and had
> > hoped that (especially wi
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--- Peter Reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This looks like a really cool method.
Agreed; I have been following this discussion and had
hoped that (especially with its latest additions) we
could utilize IntrospectionH
> From: Peter Reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >In what I have in mind, examples are not text (or CDATA sections),
> >but actual XML, in order to keep the XML infoset, which is used to
> >do the syntax highlighting. And along with syntax highlighting, you
> >can add links to actual doc for all th
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- Peter Reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> This looks like a really cool method.
>
> Agreed; I have been following this discussion and had
> hoped that (especially with its latest additions) we
> could utilize IntrospectionHelper
--- Peter Reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This looks like a really cool method.
Agreed; I have been following this discussion and had
hoped that (especially with its latest additions) we
could utilize IntrospectionHelper in some way.
-Matt
>
> Dominique Devienne wrote:
[SNIP]
> >
> >What
This looks like a really cool method.
Dominique Devienne wrote:
From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The main problem here is that there is no unique answer 8-)
Right. I'm partial to XML + XSL myself for example. I like
authoring the XML and just have to hit reload to see the HTML.
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> The main problem here is that there is no unique answer 8-)
Right. I'm partial to XML + XSL myself for example. I like
authoring the XML and just have to hit reload to see the HTML.
I looked at docbook briefly, and found it verbose and unwieldy,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote ..
> > > The main problem here is that there is no unique answer 8-)
> > >
> > > My guess is the following is more or less true:
> > >
> > > (1) autogenerate as much of the docs as possible from the Java sources.
>
> yes within reason
opps hit the send button a little t
> > The main problem here is that there is no unique answer 8-)
> >
> > My guess is the following is more or less true:
> >
> > (1) autogenerate as much of the docs as possible from the Java sources.
yes within reason
> > (2) throw in additional information in an easy to edit format.
I would f
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2005, Kev Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've read this thread with interest (as you tend to do when your
work is 'critiqued' :) ), but I'm still not sure what anyone
actually wants, apart from some kind of generated docs that produce
nice HTML output, and
On Wed, 09 Mar 2005, Kev Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've read this thread with interest (as you tend to do when your
> work is 'critiqued' :) ), but I'm still not sure what anyone
> actually wants, apart from some kind of generated docs that produce
> nice HTML output, and as an added bo
I tried to use docbook and ended up hating it too. Not enough macros
see, you may be describing structure rather than
style , but what I want is and , independent
of the structure to use.
Also, as it doesnt cross-ref across docs, it is not as good as bibtex.
I have stopped using it for now;
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Wed, 02 Mar 2005, Kev Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thoughts/comments more than welcome
Being a LaTeX guy myself, I've grown some bad feelings towards docbook
when I had to use it on one project. It's so powerless in
comparision, but maybe that's only due to the def
On Wed, 02 Mar 2005, Kev Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thoughts/comments more than welcome
Being a LaTeX guy myself, I've grown some bad feelings towards docbook
when I had to use it on one project. It's so powerless in
comparision, but maybe that's only due to the default stylesheets and
Andrew Marlow wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Andrew,
I must confess I have downloaded your bz2 file but not yet opened it.
I am interested by your work, because ant documentation needs to be
improved, but my personal inclination would be to perfect the proposal of
Erik Hatcher (with xdocs)
W
On Thursday, July 17, 2003, at 01:31 PM, Andrew Marlow wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Andrew,
I must confess I have downloaded your bz2 file but not yet opened it.
I am interested by your work, because ant documentation needs to be
improved, but my personal inclination would be to perfect the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>Andrew Marlow wrote:
>> Hello,
>> The msg below was originally intended for Steve L, another
>> Ant developer, but I have had trouble contacting him so
>> I am now sending this to a wider audience.
>
>sorry I have been in crisis, but am glad you are on the main mail list
Andrew Marlow wrote:
Hello,
The msg below was originally intended for Steve L, another
Ant developer, but I have had trouble contacting him so
I am now sending this to a wider audience.
sorry I have been in crisis, but am glad you are on the main mail list.
Apologies.
I am trying to improve the
f you would like. also there was no attatchment to your
email.
cheers, jim fuller
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrew Marlow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 27 June 2003 08:36
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Ant Documentation
>
>
> Hello,
>
> Th
Hello,
The msg below was originally intended for Steve L, another
Ant developer, but I have had trouble contacting him so
I am now sending this to a wider audience.
I am trying to improve the Ant documentation.
I would like to have a single multi-platform open format
document. I understand that
42 matches
Mail list logo
