jmeter-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Felix Schumacher <>
Subject Re: Documentation and more
Date Mon, 05 Oct 2015 20:12:09 GMT
Am 05.10.2015 um 17:18 schrieb sebb:
> On 4 October 2015 at 15:48, Felix Schumacher
> <> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I have spend a lot of time lately going through the docs for jmeter and
>> especially looking at the markup side of the documentation.
> For which many thanks.
>> I have noticed a few things, that could be (hopefully) improved.
>> Code examples
>> ---------------------
>> The code examples are all treated as plain text. There is no further markup
>> to differentiate a shell script from an xml fragment or a java source code
>> example.
>> Maybe we could use a javascript library like
>> We would have to add an language
>> attribute to each of our source code examples and extend the style sheets.
> OK, so long as the JS library has a compatible license.
>> Layout of Menu-paths and key combos
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>> Paths through menu like structures and combination of keys are text only. I
>> propose to add markup (like in docbook) for this.
> Not sure I know what that means.
You can see an example at

And by the way, do you think such a page would be useful? And if so, 
where should it be located?

>> Notes
>> --------
>> Notes can be used for different use cases like warnings or infos. I think it
>> would be nice to have an attribute on those notes to make them
>> distinguishable. The style of the note could reflect that attribute.
> OK
>> Icons with fonts
>> ---------------------
>> Fonts like provide nice looking
>> symbols, that scale well. Should we include such a font and use the symbols
>> for notes, bugs, ...? Would it be a problem, if the font had a non apache
>> license?
> Potentially, yes it might be a problem.
> Raise a LEGAL JIRA with specific proposals.
Will try to.

>> PDF files
>> -----------
>> There are a few pdf files linked on the web page. Should we convert them to
>> xml? I don't think we would really loose anything. On the other hand the
>> xml->html files would be better searchable by search sites.  We could link
>> to the original pdf files, if we want to keep them.
> There should be editable sources for the PDF files, e.g. in ODF format.
> No need to convert to XML (which would likely be much harder to maintain).
It is not the editable source I am after. I think it is nicer to read on 
browsers, that have no pdf reader embedded.
The documents seem to be pretty standard layout, so they should not 
loose anything when converted to standard doc html. The maintainance is 
a point, but a minor one in my eyes.

>> Usage of the different style sheets
>> ----------------------------------------------
>> The web page and the "printable" pages are generated by different style
>> sheets. As far as I can see, the "printable" pages are used by jmeter's
>> internal doc system. Is there any other usage for those pages?
> Yes, they are used for off-line documentation.
> We should not expect users to have to go online for the documentation.
I always looked at the documentation in the docs folder. If the 
printable one is the preferred one, we should look at the colors at least.

>> If not, we could strip the number of generated "printable" files further,
>> since I haven't seen a way to show any page except the
>> usermanual/component_reference and usermanual/functions pages.
> We need to keep offline docs.
That's right. I think offline docs are really useful.

>> The web pages should be printable with the latest additions in trunk (at
>> least on firefox and chrome).
> The website pages have menus that are not useful for offline browsing.
For me the question is, do they hurt so much, that we have to maintain 
two versions of the docs?

>> What do you think?
>> Regards,
>>   Felix

View raw message