--- Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > From: Matt Benson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > The bugreport says you started w/ Introspection to
> get
> > here... I wonder if there is some way we can
> combine
> > this doc initiative with Kev Jackson's suggestions
> on
> > validation to set
> From: Matt Benson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> The bugreport says you started w/ Introspection to get
> here... I wonder if there is some way we can combine
> this doc initiative with Kev Jackson's suggestions on
> validation to set up some kind of element/attribute
> matrix evaluation to define c
--- Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > From: Matt Benson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Beyond that, while I have DL'd these bug
> > attachment(s), I haven't yet looked at them simply
> > because my lack of expertise in this area means
> that
> > whenever I get into this I will have t
> From: Matt Benson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Beyond that, while I have DL'd these bug
> attachment(s), I haven't yet looked at them simply
> because my lack of expertise in this area means that
> whenever I get into this I will have to refer to XSLT
> references before I know what I'm looking at
--- Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm a little torn right now between 'too verbose'
> and 'enough metadata'
> in the XML vocab. I'm surprised at the lack of
> response from many
> committers too. I don't think it bodes too well for
> this work. --DD
DD, FWIW, as I earlier said,
> From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jesse Glick
>
> One minor request - that whatever the format is, it would be nice to
be
> able to construct JavaHelp output easily (probably with added or
perhaps
> modified stylesheets). That means
>
> (1) Ability to have plain HTML output - Ja
