Re: [api-dev] Re: Some consistency in IDL please

2010-10-29 Thread Jürgen Schmidt
On 10/29/10 1:35 PM, Frank Schönheit wrote: > Hi Jürgen, > >> exactly the links back into the DevGuide are useful at least from my >> point of view. > > Sure, I didn't say they aren't useful. The question is whether we should > evaluate how to replicate this functionality in doxygen. Using an > e

Re: [api-dev] Re: Some consistency in IDL please

2010-10-29 Thread Frank Schönheit
Hi Jürgen, > exactly the links back into the DevGuide are useful at least from my > point of view. Sure, I didn't say they aren't useful. The question is whether we should evaluate how to replicate this functionality in doxygen. Using an existing source code documentation tool, and enhancing it (

Re: [api-dev] Re: Some consistency in IDL please

2010-10-29 Thread Jürgen Schmidt
On 10/29/10 1:12 PM, Frank Schönheit wrote: > Hi Michael, > >>> @since OpenOffice.org 3.3 >>> @since OOo 3.3 >>> @since OOo 3.3.0 >>> @since OOo3.3 >>> @since OpenOffice.org 3.3 >>> >>> Please, API developers, could you stick to one rule ? :-) >> >> yes, that would indeed be a good idea :) >> can

Re: [api-dev] Re: Some consistency in IDL please

2010-10-29 Thread Frank Schönheit
Hi Michael, >> @since OpenOffice.org 3.3 >> @since OOo 3.3 >> @since OOo 3.3.0 >> @since OOo3.3 >> @since OpenOffice.org 3.3 >> >> Please, API developers, could you stick to one rule ? :-) > > yes, that would indeed be a good idea :) > can somebody (jsc?) please declare one of these as "correct"

[api-dev] Re: Some consistency in IDL please

2010-10-29 Thread Michael Stahl
On 29/10/2010 12:17, Bernard Marcelly wrote: > Hello, > This is not a problem, just an annoyance which could be avoided. > > I downloaded the Dev SDK for version 3.3, and run a grep tool on all IDL > files, > to find out which files contain the string : @since > > The following remarks are also