On 1/7/2016 7:53 AM, Louis Dionne wrote:
Robert Ramey
writes: A few observations
[...]
f) javescript.
I thing the admonitions agains java script should be softened. Most of the concerns existent when the document was originally written don't apply to day. I would like to see our html documentation support thinks like syntax coloring, running example code online, and the like. These things are often supported via injected javascript.
+1
I think JavaScript should be allowed, and even encouraged when it makes the documentation much superior. For example, Hana uses JavaScript to integrate performance benchmarks to the documentation in a nice way.
I'm one of those that used to disable javascript by default. I wouldn't mind its use when it results in a superior documentation, as long as it's optional and I can still get at least a mediocre documentation with the basic information, and possibly some hint that I need to enable javascript for this site to see more (not just to navigate differently).
Plus, all major browsers support JavaScript now, so I see this restriction as being outdated.
That might address one of the reasons given for banning it, namely: - Incompatible with some older browsers and some text based browsers. What's your take on the remaining ones? - Makes printing docs pages difficult. - Often results in really bad user interface design. - "It's just annoying in general." - Would require Boost to test web pages for ECMAScript/JavaScript compliance. - Makes docs maintenance by other than the original developer more difficult. Regards, -- Agustín K-ballo Bergé.- http://talesofcpp.fusionfenix.com