Documentation browser is very limited (even more limited than Internet Explorer 6)! After inspecting ui\src\docbrowser.cpp, I understood browser simplicity even I'm understanding nothing from C(++).
So I think it's good to remove whole document browser and make help-button to open user's own browser and same local documentation pages there.
Pros:
- Would make it possible to use JavaScript, CSS and advanced HTML = possible to make more informative documentation.
Cons:
- Icons and images must be included as files into build
- Work to do! :) (As I said, I don't have experience from C(++), so I cannot help, sorry!)
I can contribute with that documentation (HTML, CSS, JS and of course text) if this got implemented.
As gallup, I ask how many see this good idea.
Last edit: Petja Touru 2013-02-19
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Unless there are capabilities of the built in help browser that aren't being exploited at this point, I can't see how doing that would hurt anything (and as you said, it could definitely open up some additional possibilities).
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I'm still not convinced that documentation really needs to change look.
I did a quick research and discovered that it is possible to have serious browser capabilities inside QLC+ but it would require to include the WebKit engine.
Means 19MB of extra library !
Linux version wouldn't care of that since libraries are dynamic, but Windows and OSX packages would increase the size significantly.
Is this really worth it ?
What would CSS and JavaScript bring to the documentation that is mandatory right now ?
I would rather setup a "side project" of documentation in a ZIP package that can be downloaded separately and opened with a web browser.
Then all the latest cool web features could be introduced and QLC+ wouldn't suffer of any change.
What do you think ?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Do you mean I (or you) create a repo that is some way linked with QLC+'s help button? If help packace isn't "installed", QLC+'s help button would open GitHub/SF to download it, otherwise it would open Webkit/Gecko-based help browser.
If we use external or anyway better browser, it would be many times easier to make better documentation. It's very hard to explain why this would be good idea . . .
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I mean that I would offer the user 2 choices:
- essential help inside QLC+ (current one, no changes)
- external full help, with examples, screenshots, CSS, JavaScript, etc.. to be opened with the user's preferred browser
I understand you're more skilled than me in web stuff, and I don't have much time to follow this task too. So, if you like, you could pick this up and create the package. Once you've got a first shot you can instruct me where to download it.
I will assist you in improving/adding/removing contents.
Fair enough ?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Sounds interesting.
But how this external help is provided? How users know there's available that? Two different packages on SF, second including also this help? Or how . . . ?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Every time a new release is available I can upload the documentation package in the same folder.
Also, I think it is possible to add a link to the internal documentation saying something like "Full documentation available online. Click here to download"
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
That's okay, but still consider also adding documentation (https://github.com/Petja/qlcplus-docs) as Git's submodule to QLC+; you always have documentation with the software, no multiple downloads. If icons, pictures, etc. would be available as files on build, this would be possible, otherwise no.
Last edit: Petja Touru 2013-02-20
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Hi,
Documentation browser is very limited (even more limited than Internet Explorer 6)! After inspecting ui\src\docbrowser.cpp, I understood browser simplicity even I'm understanding nothing from C(++).
So I think it's good to remove whole document browser and make help-button to open user's own browser and same local documentation pages there.
Pros:
- Would make it possible to use JavaScript, CSS and advanced HTML = possible to make more informative documentation.
Cons:
- Icons and images must be included as files into build
- Work to do! :)
(As I said, I don't have experience from C(++), so I cannot help, sorry!)
I can contribute with that documentation (HTML, CSS, JS and of course text) if this got implemented.
As gallup, I ask how many see this good idea.
Last edit: Petja Touru 2013-02-19
Unless there are capabilities of the built in help browser that aren't being exploited at this point, I can't see how doing that would hurt anything (and as you said, it could definitely open up some additional possibilities).
Thank you for supporting my proposal!
No problem! Perhaps you could support mine:
https://sourceforge.net/p/qlcplus/discussion/general/thread/3b2a01aa/
:)
Just found little problem,
icons and images must be included as files into build or they're not visible
I'm still not convinced that documentation really needs to change look.
I did a quick research and discovered that it is possible to have serious browser capabilities inside QLC+ but it would require to include the WebKit engine.
Means 19MB of extra library !
Linux version wouldn't care of that since libraries are dynamic, but Windows and OSX packages would increase the size significantly.
Is this really worth it ?
What would CSS and JavaScript bring to the documentation that is mandatory right now ?
I would rather setup a "side project" of documentation in a ZIP package that can be downloaded separately and opened with a web browser.
Then all the latest cool web features could be introduced and QLC+ wouldn't suffer of any change.
What do you think ?
Do you mean I (or you) create a repo that is some way linked with QLC+'s help button? If help packace isn't "installed", QLC+'s help button would open GitHub/SF to download it, otherwise it would open Webkit/Gecko-based help browser.
If we use external or anyway better browser, it would be many times easier to make better documentation. It's very hard to explain why this would be good idea . . .
I mean that I would offer the user 2 choices:
- essential help inside QLC+ (current one, no changes)
- external full help, with examples, screenshots, CSS, JavaScript, etc.. to be opened with the user's preferred browser
I understand you're more skilled than me in web stuff, and I don't have much time to follow this task too. So, if you like, you could pick this up and create the package. Once you've got a first shot you can instruct me where to download it.
I will assist you in improving/adding/removing contents.
Fair enough ?
Sounds interesting.
But how this external help is provided? How users know there's available that? Two different packages on SF, second including also this help? Or how . . . ?
Every time a new release is available I can upload the documentation package in the same folder.
Also, I think it is possible to add a link to the internal documentation saying something like "Full documentation available online. Click here to download"
That's okay, but still consider also adding documentation (https://github.com/Petja/qlcplus-docs) as Git's submodule to QLC+; you always have documentation with the software, no multiple downloads. If icons, pictures, etc. would be available as files on build, this would be possible, otherwise no.
Last edit: Petja Touru 2013-02-20