Simon Marlow writes:
> This change has now been made.
Uh ... any hints what has changed? A new command line flag?
> we need a way to retain the collapsed/expanded state
> between page transitions (JavaScript hackers apply
> here!).
I am not certain whether these collapsed menus are a go
On 27 September 2004 21:15, Peter Simons wrote:
> Simon Marlow writes:
>
> > This change has now been made.
>
> Uh ... any hints what has changed? A new command line flag?
>
>
> > we need a way to retain the collapsed/expanded state
> > between page transitions (JavaScript hackers apply
>
While I am at it: There is another (rather simple) feature
I'd like to see in Haddock. I often link to
Haddock-generated documentation on my web pages, but there
is no way for me to link _back_ from the Haddock output.
Would it be possible to add command line switch to specify
an "up" link and the
On the theme of improving Haddock, do you think it could be fixed to
generate valid HTML? Here are some examples of the errors I get when
running Haddock output through "validate" (the Web Design Group's
HTML and XML validator).
*** Errors validating Text.XML.HaXml.Combinators.html: ***
L
On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 04:05:59PM +0100, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
> On the theme of improving Haddock, do you think it could be fixed to
> generate valid HTML?
Maybe it would be a good idea to use Peter Thiemann's WASH/HTML
library? Dependence on external library is one obvious (small?) problem
tha
Simon Marlow writes:
> The tree is expanded by default now (Sven Panne made the
> change a few days ago).
I have rebuilt everything from CVS HEAD moments ago and the
generated reference documentation still comes with the menus
collapsed. Am I doing something wrong?
Peter
_
On 28 September 2004 16:06, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
> On the theme of improving Haddock, do you think it could be fixed to
> generate valid HTML? Here are some examples of the errors I get when
> running Haddock output through "validate" (the Web Design Group's
> HTML and XML validator).
Oops! I
On 30 September 2004 10:08, Simon Marlow wrote:
> On 28 September 2004 16:06, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
>
>> On the theme of improving Haddock, do you think it could be fixed to
>> generate valid HTML? Here are some examples of the errors I get when
>> running Haddock output through "validate" (the