Re: [boost] ATTENTION: Library requirements..

Subject: Re: [boost] ATTENTION: Library requirements..
From: Agustín K-ballo Bergé (kaballo86_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-01-07 07:40:44

On 1/7/2016 7:53 AM, Louis Dionne wrote:
> Robert Ramey <ramey <at> rrsd.com> 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 as being outdated.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