I added two checkboxes to filter for just top-level components, or just
view beads. A better filtering UI is needed for filtering on dozens of
keyword, not two. Suggestions are welcome.
But I think it shows that filtering may really help customers wade through
the tons of FlexJS classes.
Thanks
Hi,
> Is this true? The article Om posted seems to disagree.
While Google can index content from JS apps [4] they may not index all content
or may not give it equal weight / ranking to other static content. It’s
complicated, for instance see [1][2] (answered by a Google employee). And
exactly
On Dec 18, 2016 7:32 AM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>
>
>> So my line of thinking is: folks have limited time to contribute, so
>> spending that limited resource on static site generation of data is a
>>bit
>> contradictory.
>
>
>Don't we already generate HTML from asdocs? What more do you think we
>ne
>
>
>> So my line of thinking is: folks have limited time to contribute, so
>> spending that limited resource on static site generation of data is a
>>bit
>> contradictory.
>
>
>Don't we already generate HTML from asdocs? What more do you think we
>need
>to do on this. Other than maintenance? Ho
On 12/18/16, 5:27 AM, "Christofer Dutz" wrote:
>Google doesn’t index JS applications
Is this true? The article Om posted seems to disagree.
>I think HTML is best for that usecase.
>Displaying help in IDEs ususally works by looking for a file with the
>same name and relative path as the class
To add my oppinion to this topic:
I too think it’s a great idea to have some cool FlexJS tool to display our
documentation. No doubt about that.
But on the other side I think there are well established standards and there is
great benefit in supporting these too.
Google doesn’t index JS applica
On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 11:41 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
> On 12/16/16, 11:28 PM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash
> Muppirala" wrote:
>
> >On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 9:45 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On 12/16/16, 7:05 PM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash
> >>Muppirala
On 12/16/16, 11:28 PM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash
Muppirala" wrote:
>On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 9:45 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 12/16/16, 7:05 PM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash
>>Muppirala"
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Dec 16, 2016 3:15 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>> >
>>
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 9:45 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
> On 12/16/16, 7:05 PM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
> wrote:
>
> >On Dec 16, 2016 3:15 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
> >
> >Or could our framework dump out the resulting DOM and generate the static
> >HTML that way?
> >
>
On 12/16/16, 7:05 PM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
wrote:
>On Dec 16, 2016 3:15 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>
>Or could our framework dump out the resulting DOM and generate the static
>HTML that way?
>
>
>You are probably the only person who could build and maintain this :
On Dec 16, 2016 3:15 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
On 12/16/16, 3:06 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>I am surprised by the complexity of [1]. But because we have a tool
>chain, I wonder if the tool chain should somehow help. Should we have a
>tool that calls PhantomJS or some equivalent?
Or could our f
On 12/16/16, 3:06 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>I am surprised by the complexity of [1]. But because we have a tool
>chain, I wonder if the tool chain should somehow help. Should we have a
>tool that calls PhantomJS or some equivalent?
Or could our framework dump out the resulting DOM and generat
On 12/16/16, 1:36 PM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
wrote:
>
>IMO, this problem
>> needs to be made easy for all FlexJS applications and that's one reason
>>to
>> make ASDoc a RIA. So we can show folks how to do it. Are there really
>> static pages behind Home Depot and
On 12/16/16, 1:14 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>HI,
>
>> OK, but you have said elsewhere you have little time to contribute.
>
>I actually said that the amount of time I have to contribute to this
>project varies over time. It's currently summer and Xmas holidays here in
>the southern hemisphere
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
> On 12/16/16, 11:58 AM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash
> Muppirala" wrote:
>
> >On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Alex Harui wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On 12/16/16, 11:42 AM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash
> >> Muppir
HI,
> OK, but you have said elsewhere you have little time to contribute.
I actually said that the amount of time I have to contribute to this project
varies over time. It's currently summer and Xmas holidays here in the southern
hemisphere from now until mid January. People get a minimum of 4
On 12/16/16, 11:58 AM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash
Muppirala" wrote:
>On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 12/16/16, 11:42 AM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash
>> Muppirala" wrote:
>>
>> >I think we don't need to decide one way or the other
If IDEs show docs on hover or in completion while you're coding, it's
usually from parsing the original ASDoc or some intermediate format (I
think SWCs can include that DITA format that Alex was talking about).
- Josh
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 11:58 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala
wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
> On 12/16/16, 11:42 AM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash
> Muppirala" wrote:
>
> >I think we don't need to decide one way or the other right now. We need
> >simple html docs for sure.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by this. What
On 12/16/16, 11:42 AM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash
Muppirala" wrote:
>I think we don't need to decide one way or the other right now. We need
>simple html docs for sure.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. What does "simple html" mean and why
do we need it?
-Alex
The Angular docs actually aren't static HTML. It looks like an Angular app!
https://docs.angularjs.org/api/ng/function/angular.forEach
If you view source on the page above, you can see that there's a Loading...
placeholder and the real content is loaded dynamically.
- Josh
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016
I think we don't need to decide one way or the other right now. We need
simple html docs for sure. I think having the docs as an RIA as pretty
cool as well.
For example, AngularJS docs is available as mostly static content here:
https://docs.angularjs.org/api
For this kind of doc, we just need s
On 12/16/16, 1:51 AM, "Christofer Dutz" wrote:
>
>What do I have to do to get the XML files? I’ll have a look at what I
>find.
In flex-falcon/compiler-jx there is a
org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.ASDOCJSC.java
It works just like MXMLC and COMPC. If you specify
-js-output-type=FLEXJS_DITA yo
On 12/16/16, 2:06 AM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> I have the beginnings of a DITA emitter, but it needs finishing. You
>>are
>> welcome to finish it. IMO, the project is better off not having new
>> dependencies on XSLT. It is great that you are an expert at it, but it
>>is
>> more impo
Hi,
> I have the beginnings of a DITA emitter, but it needs finishing. You are
> welcome to finish it. IMO, the project is better off not having new
> dependencies on XSLT. It is great that you are an expert at it, but it is
> more important that we have redundancy in the community
I also know
I’m talking about using XSLT in the Maven plugin to convert the XML to HTML.
You don’t even need a dependency to anything, because XSLT is so standard, that
it’s part oft he JDK.
XML, XSL and HTML are everything but rocket-science ... you can do some crazy
stuff with XSL, but that’s not what I’
On 12/15/16, 3:02 AM, "Christofer Dutz" wrote:
>If there now is a „asdoc.jar“ created by the ant build, the proper way to
>do this in Maven would be to create a „asdoc“ module. Creating multiple
>jars from one codebase is usually an indicator for the need to refactor.
Well, you are welcome to
On 12/15/16, 2:59 AM, "Christofer Dutz" wrote:
>Hi Alex,
>
>great to hear that ... being someone who still thinks the static API
>documentation is important, I would like to work on a maven site mojo to
>generate that static stuff. I am very experienced with XSLT, so that
>shouldn’t be a proble
If there now is a „asdoc.jar“ created by the ant build, the proper way to do
this in Maven would be to create a „asdoc“ module. Creating multiple jars from
one codebase is usually an indicator for the need to refactor.
Chris
Am 14.12.16, 19:10 schrieb "Alex Harui" :
On 12/14/16,
Hi Alex,
great to hear that ... being someone who still thinks the static API
documentation is important, I would like to work on a maven site mojo to
generate that static stuff. I am very experienced with XSLT, so that shouldn’t
be a problem. You mentioned, that the Falcon compiler outputs XML
One of the reasons I like this idea is that it gives a chance to easily see
bugs in FlexJS.
Two things that popped up:
1) Scrolling in SWF version is slow to the point of not working.
2) Loading HTML version in Edge takes forever.
I think we should leverage this and add it as a component on whic
This is a great idea. Here are thr proper links (not broken by newlines)
[1] SWF version:
http://apacheflexbuild.cloudapp.net:8080/job/FlexJS%20ASDoc%20Example/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/examples/flexjs/ASDoc/bin-debug/ASDoc.html
[2] JS version:
http://apacheflexbuild.cloudapp.net:8080/job/F
On 12/14/16, 10:00 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos
Rovira" wrote:
>Hi Alex,
>
>great work! :)
>
>I updated the pom.xml and uploaded, but doesn't has any content yet at the
>momento (but compilation is working in js) :)
Yeah, the simple part of adding the pom to compile the sou
Hi Alex,
great work! :)
I updated the pom.xml and uploaded, but doesn't has any content yet at the
momento (but compilation is working in js) :)
2016-12-14 18:38 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
> Hi,
>
> Today I finally got enough of a FlexJS ASDoc app running to mention it on
> the list, in hope that o
34 matches
Mail list logo
