New API doc - typos and questions
-
whoa! we can post comments to the API doc now?!? whoppie!
-
Yes, you can finally comment directly in the API docs (scroll to the bottom of most of the pages). Hopefully this will help the community share their insights into the API.
We are still working through the list of comments from this thread, so don't feel as if you must copy and paste your (excellent) feedback into the site. But you can if you want to.
Cheers,
-
Thanks Scott.
Is it better that we post new comments in the actual APi docs now?@unknownuser said:
so don't feel as if you must copy and paste your (excellent) feedback into the site. But you can if you want to.
I expect I'll put down a couple of notes on some of the key issues/gotchas, -
New notes should be posted directly to the api site. That way folks visiting the docs can see them immediately and can vote on the most helpful ones. As soon as we close out the issues in this thread, I will remove it from the forums.
-
Eeexcellent!
-
@unknownuser said:
As soon as we close out the issues in this thread, I will remove it from the forums.
Don't you dare! This thread was started by ThomThom.
(1) It is more than just Errors to fix in the API docs.
-
It has ideas about making the API Docs themselves better.* It has some sample code postings.* It has some Example code (incl. one posted by you yourself Scott regarding Materials Observer,) that would be lost if the entire thread was to be deleted.* It has some suggestions for new API features (new methods, etc.) [that need to be moved to some other thread first; I think there's a hard to find API WishList somewhere.]* It has some Questions posed (some of which have never been answered,) whose answers are not really content that actually will go into the API Programmer's Reference, but are of interest.
(2) The Error postings are(to"we the customers",) a record of date and time, that an error or omission was logged. -
As it was supposed to work, you were given Moderator rights, on the promise that you would MARK the Error posts, when they were fixed (bold Green with date.)* This would then give "we" the idea of the responce time the GSUPT in attending to these errors. Any customer, in any business sector should expect no less. Any Company or Business should expect to be judged on the basis of their past performance. (Unless of course, if your Toyota.)
* I can see only a couple, of 'fixed marks' in the whole thread. YES, we understand your busy, etc., but Jim and others had offered to do the 'marking' for you. You, however, insisted that it would be easier for you to mark them yourself.* I feel the record should stand, and I don't care who marks them; but those fixed should be marked as such.
(3)I understand wanting to start fresh for the next API Revision, BUT... -
If there was a Revision / Issue number on the API documents page(s) we would be able to correlate the Error threads HERE (on SCF,) with the doc pages over on code.google.com
-
THEN whenever you push an update, we can retire a thread here and start a new one for the next Revision.
(4) In order to help make this work better in the future: -
We need to stop being lazy, and post ONLYErrors to the API Error threads.* Post API Suggestions to the API WishList (me guilty!)
* Post API Docs Discussions to the API Comments thread Remus just started.* We need to discuss the issue of whether a feature or method behavior is or is not an error, in a separate thread (it's own or the Discussion thread,) and then only when the issue is identified as a error, post a 'action item' in the current API Error thread.* The current API Error thread's title needs to be marked [current].* Retired API Error threads should be re-labeled [closed].* (Each API Error thread start post should have a standardized list similar to the 6 bullet items above, along with the current API Docs Revision / Issue number at the top.)
@ThomThom: So, of course this means this whole post should be moved to the Discussion thread. (Everything from ThomThom's "whoa!" post on down.)
-
-
How about - when the issues from this thread has been addressed we lock and unstick it?
(I can move some posts around later on.)
-
TextureWriter.write_all
http://code.google.com/intl/nb/apis/sketchup/docs/ourdoc/texturewriter.html#write_all@unknownuser said:
Arguments:
entity: A face, image, component instance, group, or layer to write.
dirname: The directory to write to.
side: If the entity is a face, the side is used to indicate the side of the face being written (true if front, false if back.)
Returns:The third parameter is wrong. True activates the 8.3 file naming convention, false for extended filenames.
-
@thomthom said:
How about - when the issues from this thread has been addressed we lock and unstick it?
(I can move some posts around later on.)
I can move my suggestions over to the 'API WishList' thread. It seemed easier to voice them at the time I noticed the errors (I always added them after stating the errors in a different color.)
But I can understand how all the extra 'noise' makes using the thread as a checklist difficult for the GSUPT (Google Sketchup Product Team.)
-
The "View" documentation page is almost completely blocked by the user comments section:
EDIT: Fixed.
-
@dan rathbun said:
@unknownuser said:
As soon as we close out the issues in this thread, I will remove it from the forums.
Don't you dare!
All great points, Dan. There is a valuable historical record here, and there are a lot of posts that aren't simple docs corrections. No reason to remove it. More what I'm getting at is to make it clear where different kind of posts are best shared, as you said. This is the community's site, not mine, so ultimately it's the community's decision!
Cheers,
-
@unknownuser said:
Model.select_tool
.....
Arguments:
tool - The Tool object you want to select.**Returns:** tool - **A Tool object.** %(#FF0000)[False! It returns **Sketchup::Model**] -
http://code.google.com/apis/sketchup/docs/ourdoc/face.html#classify_point
@unknownuser said:
The classify_point method is used to determine if a given Point3d is on your face. The return value will be from this list:
0: PointUnknown,
1: PointInside,
2: PointOnVertex,
4: PointOnEdge,
8: PointOnFace,
16: PointOutsidethe list should be:
0: PointUnknown,
1: PointInside,
2: PointOnEdge,
4: PointOnVertex,
8: PointOnPlane,
16: PointOutside -
@cjthompson said:
http://code.google.com/apis/sketchup/docs/ourdoc/face.html#classify_point
the list should be:
0: PointUnknown,
1: PointInside,
2: PointOnEdge,
4: PointOnVertex,
8: PointOnPlane,
16: PointOutsideWhat?? ... I need to check some of my plugins...
-
Model.get_product_family
http://code.google.com/apis/sketchup/docs/ourdoc/model.html#get_product_family[url=http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?f=180&t=5868&p=236483#p35213:1wad19kf]This thread[/url:1wad19kf] gives a second-hand indication that Model.get_product_family is deprecated and "might be removed from the API at any time."
So the question(s) I have is:
Is it ( Model.get_product_family ) really to be considered as deprecated ??
And if so, should not the API doc (link above,) mention this ( and perhaps direct coders to use Sketchup.is_pro? instead ) ??
-
@unknownuser said:
WebDialog.set_full_security=
The set_full_security= method is used to place the WebDialog into a higher security mode where remote URLs and plugins (such as Flash) are not allowed inside the browser. This defaults to false when a new WebDialog is created.This method does not exist. There is
set_full_securityBUT It doesn't take arguments!! Also I am not sure if it defaults to false on MAC since it doesn't display Flash while under Windows it does. -
WebDialog.set_full_security
@unknownuser said:@unknownuser said:
WebDialog.set_full_security=
The set_full_security= method is used to place the WebDialog into a higher security mode where remote URLs and plugins (such as Flash) are not allowed inside the browser. This defaults to false when a new WebDialog is created.This method does not exist. There is
set_full_securityBUT It doesn't take arguments!! Also I am not sure if it defaults to false on MAC since it doesn't display Flash while under Windows it does.Also the API code example has nothing to do with this method.
-
REPOST: from Mon MAR 08, 2010
The web page has still not been fixed.
API - Release Notes webpage error
http://code.google.com/apis/sketchup/docs/releases.htmlThe H2 Heading "What's new in SketchUp 7" is not displayed as a H2 heading.
The error is caused by a missing '>' (greaterthan character) on the end of the preceeding <P> element closing tag, which is now: '</P'
ie, snippit from current HTML source (line 378):` %(#804000)[<p class="post"> </p
<h2>What's new in SketchUp 7</h2>]`
"What's new in SketchUp 7" should be rendered the same as:
"What's new in SketchUp 7.0 M1"
Adding a screenshot:
-
The above error on the API Release Notes webpage no longer applies since the release of Sketchup v8.0 ...
... because all mention of Maintainance Releases have been scrubbed from the page, including the fixes, functionality and new methods that were introduced by the MR.
Example (see above,) Sketchup 7.0MR1 added the get_glued_instances instance method to the Sketchup::Face class, but now readers (especially those new to using the SUAPI,) will not know this by looking at this page. They'd need to notice the version on the right, of the method defintion, on the Face class page. [ie: SketchUp 7.0.10247 (M1)+]
Did anyone save an offline archive of the API Release Notes Page ?? ( Can you attach copy to this thread if so, please. )
-
sigh ... I only hope this is because of some restructure of the API site. Better poke a Googler just in case to make sure that info will be available somewhere.
Advertisement