forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cyriaque Dupoirieux <>
Subject Re: [Fwd: RefDoc - Neutral XML Document Format Input/Current State]
Date Tue, 02 Aug 2005 07:37:01 GMT
Diwaker Gupta a écrit :

>This sounds exciting. Do we have access to any example/samplout output of 
>One of the interesting possibilities is to generate examples automagically. 
>For instance by correlating the Java source file for a Cocoon Generator with 
>its usage in a processing pipeline.
>w.r.t Forrest, it would be nice to have a way of generating more friendly 
>documentation of the DTDs. The current DTD documentation is good, but I think 
>it could get better. Right now its a very "mechanical" kind of documentation 
>-- just listing the attributes and children and parents and so on. A little 
>more annotated DTD documentation would be great (what does each element mean, 
>what are recommended usages and so on).
Excellent idea, I remember - when I was young - that I spent lot of time 
to understand how I could have the former link and fork behaviour 
whereas we only have <a> tag in document-v20.
Maybe a little comment of the author used to be displayed in the 
generated documentation should have helped me...


>On Monday 01 August 2005 3:49 am, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>Bertrand is mentoring a GSoC project called RefDoc over at Cocoon. I'm
>>listed as a co-mentor, but my involvement is only really to help
>>Bertrand pick up the slack whilst he is busy. This is Bertrands project,
>>not mine. Having said that, I think this is very useful for Forrest as
>>The project is intended to make Cocoon applications self documenting by
>>adding javadoc like comments to the relevant files.
>>Below is a mail from Robert (the person doing the real work) asking for
>>some feedback. It would be great if Forrest folk could have a look at
>>this and let me know if there is anything they would like to see from a
>>Forrest perspective. Please reply here I will pass on a summary of our
>>observations to Robert.

View raw message