Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
> > 
> > That is the trouble - i don't know what is "correct".
> :)
> 
> > The file called components-javadoc-sitemaptask-diff.txt
> > is the difference between the list produced by scanning 
> > javadocs (finding extra clutter, maybe missing some) and the 
> > list produced by the SitemapTask.
> > diff components-source.txt components-sitemaptask.txt
> Yepp.
> 
> > This is not to say that the scanning javadocs is finding all 
> > components. It is just to provide a method for comparison.
> Ok.
> 
> > 
> > Here are some examples of components that are not found by 
> > the SitemapTask ...
> > org/apache/cocoon/matching/RegexpTargetHostMatcher
> > org/apache/cocoon/transformation/JXTemplateTransformer
> > org/apache/cocoon/selection/SessionStateSelector
> > org/apache/cocoon/transformation/CachingCIncludeTransformer
> > org/apache/cocoon/forms/formmodel/RepeaterAction
> 
> Ah, so it's the other way round and the list I provided above are those
> that are not found in the javadocs, right? I'm still trying to make
> sense of the diff file: what line is missing in which file.
> 
> > The *Pipeline components that you listed above are found by 
> > the SitemapTask but not by the scan of javadocs. That is 
> > because the correlate-table.sh script forgot to look for 
> > pipelines. But do we consider them "sitemap components"
> > that should be documented in the Userdocs?
> 
> Yes, we should :) These are sitemap components, you can selected between
> different pipeline implementations in your sitemap (caching, non-caching
> etc.), so imho it makes sense to document them as well.

That is what i thought but wasn't sure. Thanks.

I will generate some fresh files and put them at my web space
perhaps i can remove a bit more of the clutter.

--David

Reply via email to