Hi Sergey, Looks good to me. +1.
These javadocs reminded me of the “old days” when we were expecting more controls to evolve. :) I don’t think I ever did find a reliable way to identify surround sound outputs, other than assuming a certain platform specific order. -Dan > On Jun 12, 2017, at 7:29 PM, Sergey Bylokhov <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hello, > Any volunteers to review? >> >> >> Hello, >> Please review the documentation fix for jdk9. >> In the previous fixes the javadoc for javasound was cleared, but there are >> some small window for improvements. >> I suggest to check the specdiff first, because for some methods the >> specification was reworked. >> >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8181566 >> Specdiff: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8181566/specdiff.00/overview-summary.html >> Webrev can be found at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8181566/webrev.00 >> >> >> Common issues: >> - equals(),hashCode() have unusual description like "Finalizes the hashcode >> method" >> - Some classes like "Type" in "CompoundControl.java" has a notion about >> static instances, while there are no such instances(I assume this sentence a >> copied from other classes like from "Type" in BooleanControl.java). >> - In previous cleanup some classes and fields were not marked via {@code } >> tag. >> - In [1] Jonathan pointed to the documentation of html5 when the </p> is >> optional. I applied the similar existed html5 rule [2] for other tags >> </li>,</tr>,</td> - since we have no complicated tables/lists/layouts this >> stuff became smaller. >> - In some cases I updated the private specs as well, because I have an idea >> to enable (someday) doclint for private fields/methods in public packages. >> >> ccc will be filed after technical review. >> >> [1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2017-May/008335.html >> [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/syntax.html#syntax-tag-omission >
