Closed Bug 145056 Opened 23 years ago Closed 21 years ago

add new "Tools and Development" section in Mozilla Help

Categories

(Documentation Graveyard :: Help Viewer, defect)

Product:
Documentation Graveyard
Component:
Help Viewer
Platform:
x86
Windows 2000
Type:
defect
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
normal

Tracking

(Not tracked)

Status:
VERIFIED FIXED

People

(Reporter: oeschger, Assigned: danielwang)

References

(
URL
)

Details

Attachments

(3 files, 9 obsolete files)

add to TOC & Index
3.31 KB, patch
rjkeller
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
developer_tools.xhtml 1.14
2.39 KB, patch
rjkeller
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
patch. add developer_tools.xhtml to jar.mn
1007 bytes, patch
rjkeller
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
Need something to house help topics for the UI and tools that aren't in Netscape.
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Changed file name to tools_help.html and updated help-toc.rdf. Seems to match naming convention a little better.
Blocks: 129540
-> documentation
Blocks: 89898
No longer blocks: 129540
URL: chrome://help/locale/tools_help.html
Component: Help → User
Product: Browser → Documentation
Version: Trunk → unspecified
moving stuff over to an outside-the-firewall email for the time being, looking for people to pick these Help and doc bugs up for me.
Assignee: oeschger → oeschger
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
--> me Ian Oeschger doesn't work on Mozilla anymore. I'm not a big documentation writer, so feel free to reassign. Nilson: *wink* *wink* *nudge* *nudge*.
Assignee: oeschger → rlk
QA Contact: tpreston → stolenclover
yeah, but we need DOM Inspector and other stuff. We could ask for permission to use this Venkman Tutorial in Mozilla Help.
I was actually thinking about asking the writer to contribute. It's better to have someone familiar with Web developer stuff in the team.
assuming the writer is familiar with DOM Insector. Sounds like a good idea to me.
Daniel, do you know contact information for this guy? I'll give him a email if you do.
Attached patch developer_tools.xhtml (obsolete) — — Splinter Review
We don't have time writing web dev stuff. Web links should be enough...
Attachment #83914 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #132791 - Flags: review?(rlk)
Attachment #132792 - Flags: superreview?(timeless)
Attachment #132792 - Flags: review?(rlk)
Comment on attachment 132791 [details] [diff] [review] developer_tools.xhtml r=rlk@trfenv.com. Looks good. Once the new CSS is in, I'll check it in.
Attachment #132791 - Flags: review?(rlk) → review+
Comment on attachment 132792 [details] [diff] [review] followup patch - add entry to TOC r=rlk@trfenv.com on the RDF patch. super-review isn't needed on RDF.
Attachment #132792 - Flags: superreview?(timeless)
Attachment #132792 - Flags: review?(rlk)
Attachment #132792 - Flags: review+
Blocks: 145926
*** Bug 145926 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Keller, this is ready for check-in, you know ;-)
Comment on attachment 132791 [details] [diff] [review] developer_tools.xhtml sorry to minus the review late in the game, but some changes need to be made: > <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="chrome://help/skin/helpFileLayout.css" /> Change this to chrome://help/locale/helpFileLayout.css. > <p> > <a id="inspector"></a> Let's do <h1 id="web_development_tools">Web Development Tools</h1> instead of the anchor. We should also have a heading.
Attachment #132791 - Flags: review+ → review-
Attached patch developer_tools.xhtml (obsolete) — — Splinter Review
Attachment #132791 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #133657 - Attachment is patch: true
Attachment #133657 - Attachment mime type: text/html → text/plain
Attachment #133657 - Flags: review?(caillon)
Comment on attachment 133657 [details] [diff] [review] developer_tools.xhtml ><?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?> ><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd"[ > <!ENTITY % brandDTD SYSTEM "chrome://global/locale/brand.dtd" > > %brandDTD; >] >> > ><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> ><head> > <title>Mozilla Tools and Development</title> > <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="chrome://help/locale/helpFileLayout.css" /> ></head> > ><body> > ><h1 id="web_development_tools">Web Development Tools</h1> > ><p> >&brandShortName; provides many useful functions >to help Web developers develope and debug their Web >applications in Mozilla. Some of these are optional >component but all are accessible via the Tools, Web >Development menu. These tools are:</p> we don't really provide them if they are optional, but they are more than just functions. "develop" "optional components" Generally, menu names should be distinguished from the normal text somehow. Try: +<p> +For web developers, &brandShortName; offers several optional +components to aid in developing and debugging Web applications. +When installed, the following tools may be accessed from the +<tt>Tools &gt; Web Development</tt> menu. ><ul> > <li> > <p><strong>JavaScript Console</strong>: the console > window display warnings, error messages, and text > dumps Text dumps (assuming you mean window.dump() ) don't get sent to the JS Console, but rather the system console (stdout). Try: Displays JavaScript warnings, errors, and notices that occur in Web applications. for JavaScript in Web pages as well as the > Mozilla application itself. > </p> > </li> > > <li id="inspector"> > <p><strong>DOM Inspector</strong>: the DOM Inspector > sidebar visualizes the HTML structure of Web pages as > seen by the parser. Um, no it doesn't. The parser sees some things in HTML especially and may output "fixed" HTML. Plus, DOM Inspector works on more than HTML. Also, DOM Inspector is an application by itself which _may_ be installed as a sidebar, but does not have to be. It also allows you to change > text and page element attributes and see the effect > dynamically.</p> Try: "a tool that can be used to inspect and edit the DOM of any web document or XUL application." > > <p>Online resources:</p> > <ul> > <li><a href="http://www.brownhen.com/DI.html"> > Introduction to the DOM Inspector</a> (Ian Oeschger)</li> > <li><a href="http://www.mozilla.org/projects/inspector/faq.html"> > DOM Inspector FAQ</a> (mozilla.org)</li> > <li><a href="http://grayrest.com/moz/evangelism/tutorials/dominspectortutorial.shtml"> > grayrest's Guide to the DOM Inspector</a></li> > <li>Creating Applications with Mozilla - Appendix B3 > <a href="http://books.mozdev.org/html/mozilla-app-b-sect-3.html"> > The DOM Inspector</a></li> > </ul> > </li> > > <li> > <p><strong>JavaScript Debugger</strong>: also > known as <q>Venkman</q>, this utility allows you > write Um, you can write JavaScript in Venkman? Last I heard, you couldn't (where write in the web development sense means in an actual editor to which you can save your buffer) How about short and simple: "A full-featured JavaScript Debugger" You should probably link to the project page for each tool so you can avoid trying to incorrectly describe complex applications in a short sentence (though I'm not sure JSConsole has a page just yet). If someone is interested in the tool, they will be able to learn more about the features there. N.B.: Has anyone considered using definition lists for help? Using unordered lists seems extremely lame.
Attachment #133657 - Flags: review?(caillon) → review-
--> Daniel Wang. This is out of my expertise and Daniel seems to have a good grip on it.
Assignee: rlk → stolenclover
Attached file developer_tools.xhtml 1.1 (obsolete) —
Attachment #133657 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attached patch developer_tools.xhtml 1.11 (obsolete) — — Splinter Review
hmm... try again
Attachment #135029 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #135030 - Attachment is patch: true
Attachment #135030 - Flags: review?(caillon)
QA Contact: stolenclover → rlk
Attachment #135030 - Flags: review?(caillon) → review?(rlk)
Comment on attachment 135030 [details] [diff] [review] developer_tools.xhtml 1.11 Daniel, may you please add a <li id=""> for the JS Console and the JavaScript debugger so that we can link them to the TOC. Other than that, looks great!
Attachment #135030 - Flags: review?(rlk)
Attached file developer_tools.xhtml 1.12 (obsolete) —
pourquois pas.
Attached patch add to TOC (obsolete) — — Splinter Review
Attachment #132792 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #135030 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #136277 - Flags: review?(rlk)
Attachment #136278 - Flags: review?(rlk)
Comment on attachment 136277 [details] developer_tools.xhtml 1.12 r=rlk@trfenv.com. This looks great, Daniel!
Attachment #136277 - Flags: review?(rlk) → review+
Comment on attachment 136278 [details] [diff] [review] add to TOC r=rlk@trfenv.com This is good, but if you have time, I'd like some index entries. I might create some when I get a day off of work over the weekend if you run out of time.
Attachment #136278 - Flags: review?(rlk) → review+
Attached file developer_tools.xhtml 1.13 (obsolete) —
oops, markup error
Attachment #136277 - Attachment is obsolete: true
previous patch has xml markup prob. This one adds entries to TOC and Index. Also adds "full screen mode" Index entry as extra
Attachment #136278 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #138534 - Flags: review?(rlk)
Attachment #138537 - Flags: review?(rlk)
Comment on attachment 138534 [details] developer_tools.xhtml 1.13 There is a XML Parsing error in this document.
Attachment #138534 - Flags: review?(rlk) → review-
Comment on attachment 138537 [details] [diff] [review] add to TOC & Index looks good! r=rlk@trfenv.com
Attachment #138537 - Flags: review?(rlk) → review+
oops. fixed markup. also use .separate style to make the page prettier. and replaces Mozilla w/ &brandShortName;
Attachment #138534 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #138639 - Flags: review?(rlk)
Comment on attachment 138639 [details] [diff] [review] developer_tools.xhtml 1.14 looks good! r=rlk@trfenv.com
Attachment #138639 - Flags: review?(rlk) → review+
Fix checked in.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 21 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
looks like jar.mn was never updated
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: FIXED → ---
Attachment #138889 - Flags: review?(rlk)
Comment on attachment 138889 [details] [diff] [review] patch. add developer_tools.xhtml to jar.mn r=rlk@trfenv.com
Attachment #138889 - Flags: review?(rlk) → review+
rlk, please update jar.mn. developer_tools.xhtml is still not in today's build.
Any progress on this one?
This was actually fixed 2004-01-29.
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Closed: 21 years ago → 21 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Creator:
Created:
Updated:
Size: