Thread: Re: [Doxygen-develop] Interest in new XML format for Doxygen export
Brought to you by:
dimitri
Menu
▾
▴
doxygen-develop
|
From: Ted D. <ted...@jp...> - 2007-12-14 16:55:12
|
Jason, I would love to see something like this included. We use doxygen to create a reference manual for C++ software that's used by people through a Python interface. It's a ton of work to munge the output documentation to something is Python-like that people can understand. If we had a good XML format, this type of work could all be done through XSLT or XML processing. Ted Jason McKesson <korval2@gm...>: >I am currently working on exporting a new XML format from Doxygen. I was >wondering if there would be some interest in integrating this into the main >line when it is finished. > >If you want more details about how this format differs from the current >Doxygen XML format, please let me know. Ted Drain Jet Propulsion Laboratory ted...@jp... |
|
From: Pablo Y. <Ek...@gm...> - 2008-01-21 09:30:38
|
Hi all, I came across to this thread since we have tons of doxygen HTML documentation and we want to integrate it with other documents. We are introducing DITA in our system and a clearly structured doxygen-XML would be the right starting point. I don't know how long it would take to get the new doxygen XML format but I am positively interesting in producing deliverables very soon, and some other DITA-colleagues as well, so if anyone else is working also on that we could join forces to develop some stylesheet to process the current XML. Best Regards, Pablo |
|
From: Jason M. <ko...@gm...> - 2008-01-22 06:05:43
|
Well, as much as I would like to, there's not much I can do to help. I can't build Doxygen, so I can't update from my current version to one that I could produce a patch for and submit it. I gave the code to Ted Drain, who seemed interested in making a proper patch for Doxygen, but I haven't heard back from him about it. And the current XML is just not appropriate for any reasonable conversion process. You can turn it into something that looks like the current Doxygen documentation, but you would never be able to do anything freeform with it. Not through XSLT alone. Pablo Yamamoto wrote: > Hi all, > > I came across to this thread since we have tons of doxygen HTML documentation and we want to integrate it with other documents. We are introducing DITA in our system and a clearly structured doxygen-XML would be the right starting point. > > I don't know how long it would take to get the new doxygen XML format but I am positively interesting in producing deliverables very soon, and some other DITA-colleagues as well, so if anyone else is working also on that we could join forces to develop some stylesheet to process the current XML. > > Best Regards, > > Pablo > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Doxygen-develop mailing list > Dox...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/doxygen-develop > > |
|
From: Ted D. <ted...@jp...> - 2008-01-22 17:13:53
|
Sorry - I'm still here an interested. We're just in the middle of a critical delivery so I haven't had to time to get to it. I should have time at the end of this week or early next week to update the patches. > -----Original Message----- > From: dox...@li... [mailto:doxygen- > dev...@li...] On Behalf Of Jason McKesson > Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 10:06 PM > To: Pablo Yamamoto > Cc: dox...@li... > Subject: Re: [Doxygen-develop] Interest in new XML format for Doxygen > export > > Well, as much as I would like to, there's not much I can do to help. I > can't build Doxygen, so I can't update from my current version to one > that I could produce a patch for and submit it. I gave the code to Ted > Drain, who seemed interested in making a proper patch for Doxygen, but > I > haven't heard back from him about it. > > And the current XML is just not appropriate for any reasonable > conversion process. You can turn it into something that looks like the > current Doxygen documentation, but you would never be able to do > anything freeform with it. Not through XSLT alone. > > Pablo Yamamoto wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I came across to this thread since we have tons of doxygen HTML > documentation and we want to integrate it with other documents. We are > introducing DITA in our system and a clearly structured doxygen-XML > would be the right starting point. > > > > I don't know how long it would take to get the new doxygen XML format > but I am positively interesting in producing deliverables very soon, > and some other DITA-colleagues as well, so if anyone else is working > also on that we could join forces to develop some stylesheet to process > the current XML. > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Pablo > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > > _______________________________________________ > > Doxygen-develop mailing list > > Dox...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/doxygen-develop > > > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Doxygen-develop mailing list > Dox...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/doxygen-develop |
|
From: Jason M. <ko...@gm...> - 2007-12-15 04:27:30
|
I actually have this about 90% working (only a few of Doxygen features are not exported), and have had it around for some time. But there is a significant problem. Namely, that my changes are built against Doxygen 1.5.1, and the latest releases of Doxygen do not support Visual Studio 2003, which I use. If it uses a meta-build system like CMake or Premake that could export build files for virtually any development environment, then I could upgrade Doxygen and submit it as a patch. Ted Drain wrote: > Jason, > I would love to see something like this included. We use doxygen to > create a reference manual for C++ software that's used by people > through a Python interface. It's a ton of work to munge the output > documentation to something is Python-like that people can > understand. If we had a good XML format, this type of work could all > be done through XSLT or XML processing. > > Ted > > Jason McKesson <korval2@gm...>: > >> I am currently working on exporting a new XML format from Doxygen. I was >> wondering if there would be some interest in integrating this into the main >> line when it is finished. >> >> If you want more details about how this format differs from the current >> Doxygen XML format, please let me know. >> > > Ted Drain Jet Propulsion Laboratory ted...@jp... > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: > Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. > It's the best place to buy or sell services > for just about anything Open Source. > http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace > _______________________________________________ > Doxygen-develop mailing list > Dox...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/doxygen-develop > > |
|
From: Dimitri v. H. <do...@gm...> - 2007-12-16 19:37:09
|
Hi Jason, I'm interested in what you have been working on, so please tell us more about it. Building doxygen should not be a significant problem: Doxygen does build with Studio 2005 (even with the free (as in beer) express version), or with cygwin (or mingw), so it should not be a problem to get that working on your system. If you have a patch against 1.5.1 that may already be useful. Regards, Dimitri On Dec 15, 2007 5:27 AM, Jason McKesson <ko...@gm...> wrote: > I actually have this about 90% working (only a few of Doxygen features > are not exported), and have had it around for some time. But there is a > significant problem. Namely, that my changes are built against Doxygen > 1.5.1, and the latest releases of Doxygen do not support Visual Studio > 2003, which I use. If it uses a meta-build system like CMake or Premake that > could export build files for virtually any development environment, then I > could upgrade Doxygen and submit it as a patch. > > > Ted Drain wrote: > > Jason, > I would love to see something like this included. We use doxygen to > create a reference manual for C++ software that's used by people > through a Python interface. It's a ton of work to munge the output > documentation to something is Python-like that people can > understand. If we had a good XML format, this type of work could all > be done through XSLT or XML processing. > > Ted > > Jason McKesson <korval2@gm...> <korval2@gm...>: > > > I am currently working on exporting a new XML format from Doxygen. I was > wondering if there would be some interest in integrating this into the main > line when it is finished. > > If you want more details about how this format differs from the current > Doxygen XML format, please let me know. > > > Ted Drain Jet Propulsion Laboratory ted...@jp... > > |
|
From: Ted D. <ted...@jp...> - 2007-12-18 17:02:39
|
Dimitri, I think the changes can be summarized like this: Doxygen outputs an XML schema that is mostly an XML representation of the HTML documentation. This means that for a given element (say a function), the "data" (arguments, short description, long description, etc) for that element is stored in several locations and sometimes the same data is stored in multiple locations. I hope I'm not putting words in Jason's mouth but the here my take on his changes: The goal of the change is to make an XML schema that is a representation of the data that doxygen has parsed and created, not a representation of the HTML. This would make it much easier to write XML style sheets and applications to process this documentation into different formats (like heavily customized HTML). We really need something like this because we're combining documentation from user's guides, C++, and Python into a single documentation repository that needs to have a common style for how the various constructs are shown. I think that a big part of the benefit of this representation is that it makes all of the good things that doxygen does more accessable. It's difficult to dig through the doxygen C++ data structures in order to make custom documents (and it's hard to keep patches up to date, etc). By having doxygen do the parsing, grouping, cross-linking, etc and then outputting that in XML, we can write stand-alone XML processing engines that do our customization work without having to understand or change the doxygen internals. Ted At 11:37 AM 12/16/2007, Dimitri van Heesch wrote: >Hi Jason, > >I'm interested in what you have been working on, so please tell us >more about it. > >Building doxygen should not be a significant problem: >Doxygen does build with Studio 2005 (even with the free (as in beer) >express version), >or with cygwin (or mingw), so it should not be a problem to get that >working on your system. >If you have a patch against 1.5.1 that may already be useful. > >Regards, > Dimitri > >On Dec 15, 2007 5:27 AM, Jason McKesson ><<mailto:ko...@gm...>ko...@gm...> wrote: >I actually have this about 90% working (only a few of Doxygen >features are not exported), and have had it around for some time. >But there is a significant problem. Namely, that my changes are >built against Doxygen 1.5.1, and the latest releases of Doxygen do >not support Visual Studio 2003, which I use. If it uses a meta-build >system like CMake or Premake that could export build files for >virtually any development environment, then I could upgrade Doxygen >and submit it as a patch. > > >Ted Drain wrote: >> >>Jason, >> >>I would love to see something like this included. We use doxygen to >> >>create a reference manual for C++ software that's used by people >> >>through a Python interface. It's a ton of work to munge the output >> >>documentation to something is Python-like that people can >> >>understand. If we had a good XML format, this type of work could all >> >>be done through XSLT or XML processing. >> >> >>Ted >> >> >>Jason McKesson <mailto:korval2@gm...><korval2@gm...>: >> >> >>> >>>I am currently working on exporting a new XML format from Doxygen. I was >>> >>>wondering if there would be some interest in integrating this into the main >>> >>>line when it is finished. >>> >>> >>>If you want more details about how this format differs from the current >>> >>>Doxygen XML format, please let me know. >>> >>> >> >>Ted Drain Jet Propulsion >>Laboratory <mailto:ted...@jp...>ted...@jp... >> |
|
From: Jason M. <ko...@gm...> - 2007-12-29 23:57:35
|
BTW, I've discovered something about how Doxygen does linking to typedefs. If you use a typedef in a parameter, Doxygen links to the actual type being referenced by the typedef. While this is probably very useful in the finished format, it isn't useful for an intermediate format. XML tools can easily determine what the final type being referenced is, but going backwards is impossible. Also, the XML format outputs references as replacement for the string that was being referenced, so if you use a typedef as an argument, it is basically impossible to find out what the actual typedef used is. It would be good if Doxygen could preserve this information internally, at the level of DocVisitor. This would allow the individual DocVisitor-derived classes to decide among themselves how best to represent a link to a typedef, rather than forcing everyone to link to the final type. Ted Drain wrote: > Dimitri, > I think the changes can be summarized like this: > > Doxygen outputs an XML schema that is mostly an XML representation of > the HTML documentation. This means that for a given element (say a > function), the "data" (arguments, short description, long description, > etc) for that element is stored in several locations and sometimes the > same data is stored in multiple locations. > > I hope I'm not putting words in Jason's mouth but the here my take on > his changes: The goal of the change is to make an XML schema that is > a representation of the data that doxygen has parsed and created, not > a representation of the HTML. This would make it much easier to write > XML style sheets and applications to process this documentation into > different formats (like heavily customized HTML). > > We really need something like this because we're combining > documentation from user's guides, C++, and Python into a single > documentation repository that needs to have a common style for how the > various constructs are shown. I think that a big part of the benefit > of this representation is that it makes all of the good things that > doxygen does more accessable. It's difficult to dig through the > doxygen C++ data structures in order to make custom documents (and > it's hard to keep patches up to date, etc). By having doxygen do the > parsing, grouping, cross-linking, etc and then outputting that in XML, > we can write stand-alone XML processing engines that do our > customization work without having to understand or change the doxygen > internals. > > Ted > > At 11:37 AM 12/16/2007, Dimitri van Heesch wrote: >> Hi Jason, >> >> I'm interested in what you have been working on, so please tell us >> more about it. >> >> Building doxygen should not be a significant problem: >> Doxygen does build with Studio 2005 (even with the free (as in beer) >> express version), >> or with cygwin (or mingw), so it should not be a problem to get that >> working on your system. >> If you have a patch against 1.5.1 that may already be useful. >> >> Regards, >> Dimitri >> >> On Dec 15, 2007 5:27 AM, Jason McKesson <ko...@gm... >> <mailto:ko...@gm...>> wrote: >> >> I actually have this about 90% working (only a few of Doxygen >> features are not exported), and have had it around for some time. >> But there is a significant problem. Namely, that my changes are >> built against Doxygen 1.5.1, and the latest releases of Doxygen >> do not support Visual Studio 2003, which I use. If it uses a >> meta-build system like CMake or Premake that could export build >> files for virtually any development environment, then I could >> upgrade Doxygen and submit it as a patch. >> |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X