Re: [Patch] Re: Howto retrieve selected font size from GtkFontButton

["Nelson Benítez León" <nbenitezl gmail com>]

2008/12/3 Christian Dywan <christian imendio com>:
> Am Wed, 3 Dec 2008 12:31:23 +0100
> schrieb "Nelson Benítez León" <nbenitezl gmail com>:
>
>> 2008/12/2 Stefan Kost <ensonic hora-obscura de>:
>> > Nelson Benítez León schrieb:
>> >> 2008/12/2 Sven Herzberg <herzi gnome-de org>
>> >>> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=562998
>> >>
>> >> Ok, thank you!,  I was about to suggest that, because I thought
>> >> gtk_font_button_get_font_name just returned the font name, thanks
>> >> for this doc improvements, it would be easier if the online docs
>> >> permited user contributed notes.
>> >
>> > Let me chime in as the gtk-doc maintainer. While that sounds like a
>> > good idea its not that simple. If someone has a complete proposal I
>> > would be willing to help doing it. Problem is to feed the comments
>> > back into the docs which are in the sources.
>>
>> I don't think comments need to go back to sources, comments would be
>> in mysql indexed by the symbol name they referred to (function name,
>> class name, signal name, etc) and there would be a php page that will
>> combine the gtk-doc html with the comments and present that to the
>> user.
>
> The problem with that approach is that not everyone is using the online
> documentation. For one, it requires a perfect network connection, which
> you may not have if you're traveling or somewhere without permanent
> broadband. Plus it is obviously slower and less convenient to search,
> compare to 'devhelp'. Hence I agree with Stefan's assumption that
> comments should be folded back into the sources.

 I think nowadays, thanks to library.gnome.org, most people use online
documentation, it's way more practical because you don't have to
install any package, it's always up-to-date, it has a good google
search and you can open the information in several tabs with your
browser.

But I don't think this is an online vs offline documentation question,
I'm talking about adding a feature to the online docs, if people want
later to add that feature to the offline docs they can, just save the
html output of the online docs to disk in some browseable format.

> Maybe a compromise would be that there is a page that lists all user
> provided pieces, so that developers can easily go over the list, decide
> what's useful, file a documentation bug if appropriate, and also remove
> false information if needed. It would add a bit of maintanance but if
> it can be integrated with bugzilla logins/ permissions, it might be an
> overwieable overhead.

 I don't like this approach, it requires manpower, and what is worse,
someone who decides what is useful and whatnot, that is subjective, I
prefer there's an official documentation with no comments, and the
online documentation with the possibility to add comments. Just like
in www.php.net/docs.php where you have the online documentation with
comments, and if you choose to download the documentation (eg. to
consult it offline) then you get the official version with no
comments.