I've looked through all the files now. No other comments. So approved.
-phil.
On 05/17/2017 11:19 AM, Phil Race wrote:
I am not sure we are using the summary in a way that makes it worthwhile.
As you noted in the other mail
"The summary attribute was used to give a more descriptive value
of the contents of the table. A caption is more like a title"
The values I see are more like a title and as you say that is not the
idea. See the example here
https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/H73.html
Caption sounds like a title so it might actually be more appropriate
than summary
for the text we have except that its not clear why we'd want it to be
visible when we were fine without.
But being there and invisible may be pointless unless screen readers
look for it even if invisible.
But if its not doing any harm I guess we can leave it as proposed
I still need to look at the rest of the changes.
-phil.
On 05/12/2017 05:11 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
Sergey,
FWIW, the invisible caption should be regarded as a temporary
solution, until content authors can review/update the text of the
caption and make it visible.
The general guideline in this conversion work has been to avoid
changing the visible text of the specification, and captions fall
into a grey area of whether the text is significant/normative or
not. Hence the temporary step to make them not displayed for now.
-- Jon
On 05/12/2017 05:00 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
The "summary" is unsupported by the HTML5 and we replace it by
invisible caption.
These new styles are located in the stylesheet.css in the root of
the JavaDoc api folder, so I assume these styles should be used by
others as well.
They were added by this fix:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8179479
----- philip.r...@oracle.com wrote:
Does this in any way match the rest of the docs ? Or is everyone left
to
style things how they want.
I thought (?) maybe there is to be some javadoc tool support for CSS
styles.
Also why are all the table summaries removed ?
-phil.
On 5/12/17, 4:52 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
This is because I use the same style for most of the tables
'class="striped"', which apply the same/unified style for all(most) of
our tables.
Also this is because I removed 'inlined' styles, like here:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8180326/api_old.01/java/awt/font/TextAttribute.html
----- philip.r...@oracle.com wrote:
Adding 2d-dev because a number of the files are 2D.
What is the general reason for changing the appearance of the
tables?
-phil.
On 5/12/17, 4:25 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
Hello,
Please review the fix for jdk9-dev.
This fix is a part of the effort to make all javadoc in jdk9 be
compatible to HTML5.
It covers all errors which are reported by the javadoc tool
during
the build of jdk for java.desktop module.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8180326
Webrev can be found at:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8180326/webrev.01
Note that an appearance of some tables were changed after the
fix:
Before:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8180326/api_old.01/java/awt/font/TextAttribute.html
After:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8180326/api.01/java/awt/font/TextAttribute.html
Before:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8180326/api_old.01/javax/sound/sampled/AudioSystem.html
After :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8180326/api.01/javax/sound/sampled/AudioSystem.html
Before:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8180326/api_old.01/javax/sound/sampled/AudioPermission.html
After:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8180326/api.01/javax/sound/sampled/AudioPermission.html
