June 16, 2016 Re: Fixed date to move to ddox for Phobos documentation | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Seb | On 2016-06-04 18:10, Seb wrote: > More than two and half years ago, Sönke added ddox builds for the Phobos > documentation. We all know that there are many reasons for ddox - being > able to generate single pages for methods is just one, it also > eliminates all the JavaScript hacks (e.g. the quickindex menu, anchors, > ...) that we have added over time to deal with the shortcomings of ddoc. > > This post originates from a recent discussion [2] that showed the higher > ranking of the ddox pages in search engines because of those single > pages, more static content and meta information. > > To quote Adam [3]: > >> ddox got a decent go up to here. >> But then we need to decide what's next - a clear goal, including a due >> date, gets us all aligned and removes a lot of the uncertainty on the >> author's side; it is some reassurance that they aren't wasting their >> time, and encourages outside teams to get onboard. > > We got the MREF change into Phobos a month ago and Sönke has fixed the > last blocking bug with ddox (broken source code links) a couple of days > ago. Just found this issue [1], symbols are hyphenated in Safari. [1] https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/ddox/issues/126 -- /Jacob Carlborg |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation