On Wed, 22 May 2024 08:36:22 GMT, eduardsdv <d...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>>> @johanvos added a question in the CSR about this last part:
>>>
>>> > I understand and agree with the goal behind this.
>>> > I'm a bit confused though about the following: "...but it does not
>>> > necessarily have to be the same value." -> can you elaborate a bit about
>>> > this?
>>>
>>> I share this concern. I think that removing that last clause and putting a
>>> period after "clip view" is probably the best.
>>>
>>> Johan: what do you think?
>>
>> I agree that removing that clause is probably best to avoid confusion.
>> Having open-ended suggestions in javadoc can lead to broad speculation, so I
>> think it either should be explained (like you did in the CSR issue with the
>> rubberband effect example) or removed.
>
> We should probably also avoid the word "corresponds".
>
>
> /**
> * Returns the length of the viewport portion of the {@code VirtualFlow} as
> computed during the layout pass.
> * For a vertical flow this is based on the height and for a horizontal flow
> on the width of the clip view.
> *
> * @return the viewport length in pixels
> * @since 23
> */
>
> The text explains that depending on the orientation of the view height or
> width is used in the calculation and the word "based" makes it clear that the
> value can differ from the respective size of the view.
>
> This version looks good to me. If it is fine for you too, I would check it in.
I'm happy with this wording.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1326#discussion_r1609847508
