Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Layout of top of ITK documentation pages #5180

Closed
albert-github opened this issue Jan 25, 2025 · 2 comments · Fixed by #5220
Closed

Layout of top of ITK documentation pages #5180

albert-github opened this issue Jan 25, 2025 · 2 comments · Fixed by #5220
Labels
type:Documentation Documentation improvement or change

Comments

@albert-github
Copy link
Contributor

Currently with the doxygen 1.9.6 version the ITK top of the pages of the documentation look like:

Image

with the doxygen version 1.13.2 this will change in:

Image

The question is what is the preferred layout?

There are 2 points

  • the treeview: setting GENERATE_TREEVIEW
  • the blue bar at the top: setting DISABLE_INDEX

The defaults for these settings changed from:

GENERATE_TREEVIEW = NO
DISABLE_INDEX = NO

to

GENERATE_TREEVIEW = YES
DISABLE_INDEX = YES

(It doesn't hurt to explicitly set the wanted version already for older versions)

@albert-github albert-github added the type:Documentation Documentation improvement or change label Jan 25, 2025
@albert-github
Copy link
Contributor Author

As e.g blaster changed to doxygen version 1.13.2 the result is that there is a "treeview" and the top blue line is gone, to revert to the old layout, proposed patch: diff.patch

@dzenanz
Copy link
Member

dzenanz commented Feb 6, 2025

Thank you for pointing this out. I like the new layout better. I think it is more functional. Therefore, I am explicitly selecting it in #5220.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type:Documentation Documentation improvement or change
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants