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

Clarify that the MSL sets guidelines for itself, but others are free to follow #4253

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

henrikt-ma
Copy link
Contributor

This is a spinn-off of #4221. By clearly stating that the guidelines are primarily meant for the Modelica Standard Library itself, it is clearly up to the MAP-Lib alone to set the rules.

Modelica/package.mo Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@beutlich
Copy link
Member

Is it related to #4166?

@@ -2295,6 +2295,7 @@ Graphical illustrations shall not be added in the diagram layer, but can be adde
</ul></li>
<li> These packages should appear in the listed order.</li>
</ol>
<p>Other Modelica libraries may also take advantage of these guidelines, for example by referencing this documentation as <code>modelica:/Modelica.UsersGuide.Conventions#info</code>, or by using it as a source of inspiration for an independent set of guidelines.</p>
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why not a proper href link to the Modelica URI? Or why not linking the resolved (but version pinned one) at https://doc.modelica.org/Modelica%204.0.0/Resources/helpOM/Modelica.UsersGuide.Conventions.html.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I preferred to just make it a linked Modelica URI in order to stay completely tool agnostic. Good now?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I also think the internal reference is preferable; not to be tool agnostic but to avoid dependency on possibly changing web-sites.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@beutlich, OK to resolve?

@henrikt-ma
Copy link
Contributor Author

Is it related to #4166?

Not as far as I can tell.

Modelica/package.mo Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -2278,11 +2278,11 @@ Graphical illustrations shall not be added in the diagram layer, but can be adde
</html>"));
end Icons;
annotation (DocumentationClass=true,Documentation(info="<html>
<p>A Modelica main package should be compliant with the UsersGuide stated in this documentation:</p>
<p>User-facing packages of the Modelica Standard Library (such as <em>Modelica</em> or <em>Complex</em>) should be compliant with the UsersGuide stated in this documentation:</p>
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

To give Modelica as an example doesn't seem right, as it doesn't follow the required package structure.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants