On Jun 24, 2019, at 8:20, Palaraja, Kavindra <kpalar...@luxoft.com> wrote:
> Hi Andre, > > I'm really curious -- why is it bad to make WebEngine mandatory for anything > that passes as "Qt Creator's Help Integration"? > > I'm asking because, these days, many Software companies spend a lot of time, > energy, and money in making their documentation look and feel good. This > includes not just the large chunks of content that's published, but also the > in-line text, UI strings, tooltips, etc. They believe that it adds to the > developer experience. > > The Qt Project has a unique opportunity here, in that we have our own IDE, > which is a luxury. And there's also a way to use an existing module, > WebEngine, to improve this look and feel (among other reasons). So why > shouldn't we use it? > > Have you seen Qt Creator's Help Integration recently? > * It doesn't render 1:1 with the default style that is used on > https://doc.qt.io > * It can't display the borders for tables - so every single table looks > weird as all borders are stripped out. Qt's documentation is full of tables. > * It doesn't scale images accordingly, so you have manually guess what > Creator can display and try really hard to shrink your diagrams without > losing clarity Images don’t scale with text size scaling, you mean? That’s what I can see. I think we should fix those bugs, FWIW, regardless what we do with Creator’s help system. Personally I would like to keep using QTB-based rendering in Assistant, and have the appearance improve over time. That’s because it’s relatively lightweight. Creator cannot afford to be even more of a RAM hog than it already is, IMO: I guess it’s mostly the clang-based code model though. There are patches to improve CSS for tables, and I’m trying to work on CSS a little too, in my spare time. _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
