Boost logo

Boost :

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>> 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 as being outdated.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
- Makes docs maintenance by other than the original developer more


Agustín K-ballo Bergé.-

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at