On Mar 18, 2010, at 12:20 AM, ext Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > On Mar 17, 2010, at 8:55 AM, [email protected] wrote: > >> >> I'm working for the Qt port of WebKit, and we're currently >> considering different ways of creating web developer >> documentation for our users. >> >> We don't currently have any documentation for web developers We'd >> like to start with best practice articles and tutorials for some >> HTML5 and CSS3 features but later extend to the basics and general >> reference guides too.
> > We have a rough start on some developer documentation on webkit.org: > <http://trac.webkit.org/wiki/WebDevelopers> > That's nice to have. Ideally, we should have a neutral, vendor independent place for working on WebKit documentation, for example at the webkit.org wiki. A problem with the current wiki is that we don't have a clear license for the content and the modifications that the contributors make , so it's not clear if we could redistribute the documentation for example with our SDK. Should we have a fresh start with a new section in the wiki that has an explicit license policy? Maybe we should use the same license as Mozilla to make it easy to share stuff. > We could also autogenerate a documentation skeleton from the lists of > elements, attributes, and DOM interfaces that are actually found in > the source code. > > There is a mostly autogenerated DOM reference on developer.apple.com: > <http://developer.apple.com/safari/library/documentation/AppleApplications/Reference/WebKitDOMRef/index.html > >> > Also documentation of CSS rules: > <http://developer.apple.com/safari/library/documentation/AppleApplications/Reference/SafariCSSRef/Introduction.html > >> > > We could easily autogenerate something similar for webkit.org if we > cared to. > That'd be excellent! Are the tools that you use for autogenerating the Apple documentation openly available? > > I'd personally rather not send people looking for WebKit Web developer > documentation to mozilla.org. Cross-browser documentation is useful, > but WebKit-specific documentation is useful too. > I agree we need WebKit specific documentation, and sometimes we need to be specific about the port of WebKit too, at least when documenting for example the QtWebKit version where a certain feature was first supported. I wouldn't mind working on the Mozilla site -- they seem to be open towards having WebKit specific docs there -- but I would be happy to work on a webkit specific resource too. Regards, Henry _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
