Erich Hoover <[email protected]> wrote: >Sent: Jun 30, 2010 12:43 PM >To: James Mckenzie <[email protected]> >Cc: Alexandre Julliard <[email protected]>, Max TenEyck Woodbury ><[email protected]>, [email protected] >Subject: Re: (Resent) Documentation - Reference to MSDN? > >On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 1:36 PM, James Mckenzie ><[email protected]> wrote: >> ... >> How about some place on the Wiki along with an implementation status. That >> way we can also annotate items that are missing in MSDN (I just re-stumbled >> across something in my latest Richedit tests) as well. This would help >> greatly in our progress towards current and future implementations of the >> Windows API. >> >> And I agree, adding all of this to the source would make it unwieldy. >> > >So something like "http://wiki.winehq.org/WineAPI/<DLL>/<Function>" ? >If that's acceptable I would not mind a system like that, especially >if the links of documented functions are provided in the source. >Documenting these things is a lot of work, so I'm not about to run off >and do all that work if no-one is ever going to take advantage of it. > +1 Acceptable variables should be listed in an order other than the one on MSDN. We don't want a direct copy, but rather OUR findings using the old 'black box' method.
James McKenzie
