Website documentation question

[Nicolas Weeger]

Hello.


I've been poking around the documentation (patches ready, waiting for CLA-
related tasks to be finished :)), and I got a question about the format to use.


Right now, pages are mostly HTML, split in .md files, with a Markdown processor
converting.


So I guess the goal is to migrate to Markdown (the Pegdown variant at least),
at least step by step or for new documentation?


One downside, though, is that unless I'm mistaking, Markdown doesn't offer any
option to set IDs on elements, like headers, or names on anchors.


So should headers/linkable items be still put in HTML? Or should we use a
workaround to insert a <a name="whatever"></a> in the header?



Kind regards


Nicolas

[Julien Dramaix]

I have a big patch (done by Jason Lemay from Arcbees by the way) that I have to push for review converting every files using markdown syntax.

And indeed we use html syntax for the header:

## Related frameworks<a id="prereqs"></a>

I will push this change in a few weeks but if you want to propose a patch for anything else don't hesitate to do it. I have to rebase my patch anyway.

Julien

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Contributors" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit-contributors+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/201412052030.16089.nicolas%40nekoko.fr.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Nicolas Weeger]

Thanks for the information.


I'll use the same syntax then, to be coherent.


I've mostly written about linkers, for now, other patches are minor so it
should be trivial to merge.



Kind regards


Nicolas

> > email to google-web-toolkit-co...@googlegroups.com.