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

Apply changes to Base Units in JavaDoc #57

Closed
keilw opened this issue Aug 22, 2017 · 5 comments
Closed

Apply changes to Base Units in JavaDoc #57

keilw opened this issue Aug 22, 2017 · 5 comments
Milestone

Comments

@keilw
Copy link
Member

keilw commented Aug 22, 2017

Especially in the JavaDoc of SI Base Quantities the upcoming changes to the SI should have an impact.

@keilw keilw added this to the .Next milestone Aug 22, 2017
@keilw keilw added the prio:2 Priority 2 label Nov 3, 2018
@keilw
Copy link
Member Author

keilw commented Nov 16, 2018

@teobais
Copy link
Member

teobais commented Jan 24, 2019

Point is, what needs to be updated exactly? I mean, take Time.java docs as an example:

Period of existence or persistence. The metric system unit for this quantity is "s" (second).

What needs to be updated here?
Do we need to add the definition of s as well? Something like that maybe?
screenshot 2019-01-24 at 23 14 36

I think an example here might help.

@keilw
Copy link
Member Author

keilw commented Jan 25, 2019

Yes, the JavaDoc in many cases and the Spec document in some. Btw, I gave you (@thodorisbais) and @filipvanlaenen write access to the spec. Filip said, he should be able to represent his company soon in the EG and Thodoris has already done so, thus you're welcome to make those adjustments in the spec where necessary.

@teobais
Copy link
Member

teobais commented Jan 26, 2019

Given that the requirement contains no example, I took the liberty to open a (sample) PR (#168 ) for Time, as I fore-mentioned, so that we have at least a visual example to compare it to our actual needs.

I would be interested in your views, as mentioned in the PR.
Once again, a small PR only for one class, in order to test the waters (/your needs/views).

@teobais
Copy link
Member

teobais commented Feb 3, 2019

I guess we're good to go for now, given #173 and #172 . Closing.

@teobais teobais closed this as completed Feb 3, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants