I've been using the jamis rdoc format for some time. Recently I noticed that
it is not generating correct HTML output. Scroll down to the bottom of
http://builder.rubyforge.org/classes/Builder/XmlMarkup.html to see an
example. The method links go nowhere.
I suspect this has been going on for a while and I just noticed. Is there a
fix somewhere? (At least some of the other templates are ok ... I haven't
tried them all. But I really like the look of the jamis version).
···
--
-- Jim Weirich jim@weirichhouse.org http://onestepback.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct,
not tried it." -- Donald Knuth (in a memo to Peter van Emde Boas)
If someone has a fix, I'll be happy to apply it to my copy.
- Jamis
···
On Aug 23, 2005, at 10:19 PM, Jim Weirich wrote:
I've been using the jamis rdoc format for some time. Recently I noticed that
it is not generating correct HTML output. Scroll down to the bottom of
http://builder.rubyforge.org/classes/Builder/XmlMarkup.html to see an
example. The method links go nowhere.
I suspect this has been going on for a while and I just noticed. Is there a
fix somewhere? (At least some of the other templates are ok ... I haven't
tried them all. But I really like the look of the jamis version).
Jim Weirich wrote:
I've been using the jamis rdoc format for some time. Recently I noticed that
it is not generating correct HTML output. Scroll down to the bottom of
http://builder.rubyforge.org/classes/Builder/XmlMarkup.html to see an
example. The method links go nowhere.
I suspect this has been going on for a while and I just noticed. Is there a
fix somewhere? (At least some of the other templates are ok ... I haven't
tried them all. But I really like the look of the jamis version).
I noticed the exact same problem this morning.
I was having a problem with jamis.rb creating a blank frame (blank.html,
created by the snippet below), but rdoc wasn't creating blank.rb, so I
replaced it with the jamis.rb from rake (I guess that's the same as you
are using, Jim :). The two files were a little different. Then I got the
unlinked methods. So I'm temporarily back to the old format.
IFNOT:inline_source
<frameset rows="80%,20%">
<frame src="%initial_page%" name="docwin">
<frame src="blank.html" name="source">
</frameset>
ENDIF:inline_source
···
--
vjoel : Joel VanderWerf : path berkeley edu : 510 665 3407
Hmm ... seems like I had an old copy. The version available from here:
http://jamis.jamisbuck.org/articles/2005/04/08/rdoc-template
works for me.
···
On Wednesday 24 August 2005 12:37 am, Joel VanderWerf wrote:
Jim Weirich wrote:
> I've been using the jamis rdoc format for some time. Recently I noticed
> that it is not generating correct HTML output. Scroll down to the bottom
> of http://builder.rubyforge.org/classes/Builder/XmlMarkup.html to see an
> example. The method links go nowhere.
I noticed the exact same problem this morning.
--
-- Jim Weirich jim@weirichhouse.org http://onestepback.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct,
not tried it." -- Donald Knuth (in a memo to Peter van Emde Boas)
Whew. Good to know. Thanks for the follow-up, Jim.
- Jamis
···
On Aug 24, 2005, at 7:07 AM, Jim Weirich wrote:
On Wednesday 24 August 2005 12:37 am, Joel VanderWerf wrote:
Jim Weirich wrote:
I've been using the jamis rdoc format for some time. Recently I noticed
that it is not generating correct HTML output. Scroll down to the bottom
of http://builder.rubyforge.org/classes/Builder/XmlMarkup.html to see an
example. The method links go nowhere.
I noticed the exact same problem this morning.
Hmm ... seems like I had an old copy. The version available from here:
http://jamis.jamisbuck.org/articles/2005/04/08/rdoc-template
works for me.
Yah, I designed the template for use with inline-source, and never spent any time at all on the other. If anyone really wants to do the separate frame for displaying source, a patch would be welcome. 
- Jamis
···
On Aug 24, 2005, at 11:24 AM, Joel VanderWerf wrote:
I'm still seeing that blank box at the bottom of the window--is that for
source? It doesn't change when I hit a "source" link.
If I use --inline-source, then source shows up in the main window and
there is no empty box. I guess I'll stick to that.