Hi Ernst You are free to document whatever you like. There was a post to a howto maybe somebody can put that in cvs?
I personaly prefer to create clear interfaces with clear java documentation. the functions howto is there because the way on defining functions is not that easy. Did you look at my proposal? did you understand it?. If a builder would implement NodeFunctionProvider with the method NodeFunction getNodeFunction(Node node, String name); a simple example is enouph i think > Let met ask my standard question: > How about documentation?? > Some time ago I asked for information about the functions framework on > the list. I got some response (thanks), but the info available raises as > many question as it answers. In stead of specifc info like: how do I add > a function to a builder (allthough usefull) I would so much (and I think > other people too) to see a document outlining the goal of the framework > and the specifications and perhaps various application/implementation > strategies (like for instance the document on the xml importer). > I can't help noticing that while the development of new code for mmbase > increases, the inclination to document decreases. Example: the > documentation on the latest taglib addititons. > I read somewhere that one of the factors that defines the usefullness of > frameworks is the degree to which they are documented. I tend to agree. > Maybe the functions framework should be a project. I suppose one of the > goals of every project is to deliver documentation? That should seem > right. > > Ernst > > > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > > Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Namens Michiel Meeuwissen > > Verzonden: maandag 25 oktober 2004 17:42 > > Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Onderwerp: Re: Functions framework: status? > > > > > > > > Rob van Maris wrote: > > > In order to track progress towards release 1.8, we need more > > > information regarding the status of the Functions Framework. > > > > > > Since this isn't executed as a separate project, and several people > > > appear to have contributed, its not clear who is in charge. > > Can anyone > > > who is involved step forward and help provide us with this > > > info: > > > - What is the current status? > > > > It's more or less pending. A 'set' function implementation > > (by daniel) was added recently, but not much more. > > > > > > > - What needs to be done before release 1.8? > > > > At the very least it must be checked that this new code works > > (as I suppose it does), and is documented. > > > > Since it was released already in 1.7, there is no > > must-be-done before 1.8, but I think it may be wise to finish > > some (more) implementations and add some documentation. > > > > Michiel > > > > > > -- > > Michiel Meeuwissen mihxil' > > Mediacentrum 140 H'sum [] () > > +31 (0)35 6772979 nl_NL eo_XX en_US > > > > > > > > > > > >
