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
