beehive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rich Feit <richf...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r265602 - in /beehive/trunk/docs: ./ forrest/release/src/documentation/content/xdocs/ forrest/release/src/documentation/content/xdocs/controls/ forrest/release/src/documentation/content/xdocs/netui/
Date Thu, 01 Sep 2005 16:12:39 GMT
Fine with me (+0).  I was an original proponent of non-conflicting names 
(*not* long names based on the hierarchy FTR), but this is OK.  I'm an 
ace at ed/sed for times where we change the structure.  :)  I've edited 
the doc at http://wiki.apache.org/beehive/DocConventions .
Rich

Eddie O'Neil wrote:

>  +1 from me.  :)
>
>  I might take a crack at fixing this before we branch, but it would
>be *just* before the branch.  Just so it's taken care of in both a 1.0
>branch and trunk/.  It's really an implementation detail (doesn't
>surface in the URLs on the public site), so it's not a big deal either
>way.
>
>Eddie
>
>
>
>On 9/1/05, Daryl Olander <dolander@gmail.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>I agree with Eddie on the "navigate the document top-down" philosophy. I've
>>confirmed that XPath does work correctly. So today, we have "site:datagrid"
>>and this should become"site:NetUI/tags/datagrid ". (I renamed the
>>pageflow_tags element to tags in this example. This "site:" example was
>>found in the tagOverview.xml).
>>
>>Having said this, I think this should be a long run goal and that we don't
>>change the site.xml and matching "site:xxx" hrefs until post 1.0. I'm going
>>to check in the one sample from above as proof that it works, but the rest
>>of the clean should wait.
>>
>>Thoughts?
>>
>>
>>On 8/31/05, Eddie O'Neil <ekoneil@gmail.com> wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>I prefer using site.xml to navigate the document top-down instead of
>>>using unique names for each element. At some point, those unique
>>>names become hard to maintain unless they're fully-qualified names
>>>which is basically the XPath to the element through site.xml. So I
>>>prefer this:
>>>
>>><netui>
>>><databinding>
>>>
>>>refernced with "site:netui/databinding" to this:
>>>
>>><netui>
>>><netui_databinding>
>>>
>>>which can be referred to as "site:netui_databinding".
>>>
>>>But, I'm not religious about this -- just don't like having to repeat
>>>"netui" twice in the config file's structure and names.
>>>
>>>For line numbers, I'd prefer 120 but could live with 100. 80 is
>>>just way too 1980's. :)
>>>
>>>To Steve's questions, "PageFlow" seems right, though that is part of
>>>NetUI which includes Page Flow, the JSP tags, and other technologies
>>>that are surely yet to come. The use of "controller class" vs.
>>>"Controller class" seems like a it depends on context. But, I don't
>>>have strong feelings here either.
>>>
>>>My $0.02...
>>>
>>>Eddie
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On 8/31/05, Steve Hanson <stevelukehanson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>      
>>>
>>>>As for the tabification, I hit Ctrl+F in Eclipse at one point by
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>accident,
>>>      
>>>
>>>>that is probably the culprit. I will check the indent style on my
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Eclipse
>>>      
>>>
>>>>editor.
>>>>
>>>>I have endeavored to avoid &lt; wherever I can -- but I see no way to
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>avoid
>>>      
>>>
>>>>it when you want to display angle brackets in bold font.
>>>>
>>>>I have some questions of my own:
>>>>Should it be "Page Flow" or "Page Flow"? I am neutral on this question.
>>>>Should it be "Controller class" or "controller class"? I have a slight
>>>>preference for "Controller class", since it suggests a reference to a
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Java
>>>      
>>>
>>>>class.
>>>>
>>>>On 8/31/05, Eddie O'Neil <ekoneil@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>Steve--
>>>>>
>>>>>Great to have some "professional" edits to the documentation. :)
>>>>>
>>>>>A few comments on some of the changes made here which we might take
>>>>>a closer look at:
>>>>>
>>>>>1) I think your editor is tab-ifying some of the documentation. We're
>>>>>standardized on using four spaces rather than tabs for the doc. This
>>>>>happened at least in xdocs/netui/overview.xml
>>>>>
>>>>>2) unless there is formatting (like <strong>) that is used inside
of
>>>>>JSP content, it's much easier to write documentation using "<"
>>>>>characters than &lt;. This makes copy/paste from samples simpler
>>>>>
>>>>>3) when referring to NetUI, we tend to use the term "NetUI" rather
>>>>>than "Netui". This happened in the labels in site.xml. Also, in this
>>>>>case, it seems like we can call the NetUI Overview section just
>>>>>"Overview" since it's under the NetUI tab already. I've tried to
>>>>>remove some of that reduncancy from the docs in recent weeks.
>>>>>
>>>>>Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>>Eddie
>>>>>
>>>>>On 8/31/05, steveh@apache.org <steveh@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>Author: steveh
>>>>>>Date: Wed Aug 31 16:09:14 2005
>>>>>>New Revision: 265602
>>>>>>
>>>>>>URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=265602&view=rev
>>>>>>Log:
>>>>>>Editing run-through.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Modified:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>beehive/trunk/docs/forrest/release/src/documentation/content/xdocs/controls/tutorial_controls.xml
>>>      
>>>
>>>beehive/trunk/docs/forrest/release/src/documentation/content/xdocs/netui/getting_started.xml
>>>      
>>>
>>>beehive/trunk/docs/forrest/release/src/documentation/content/xdocs/netui/jspOverview.xml
>>>      
>>>
>>>beehive/trunk/docs/forrest/release/src/documentation/content/xdocs/netui/overview.xml
>>>      
>>>
>>>beehive/trunk/docs/forrest/release/src/documentation/content/xdocs/netui/pageFlowControllers.xml
>>>      
>>>
>>>beehive/trunk/docs/forrest/release/src/documentation/content/xdocs/netui/projects.xml
>>>      
>>>
>>>beehive/trunk/docs/forrest/release/src/documentation/content/xdocs/site.xml
>>>      
>>>
>>>>>>beehive/trunk/docs/how_to_contribute_docs.txt
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Modified:
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>beehive/trunk/docs/forrest/release/src/documentation/content/xdocs/controls/tutorial_controls.xml
>>>      
>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>

Mime
View raw message