[OpenJDK 2D-Dev] [10] Review Request: 8184435 Cleanup of javadoc in javax.print package

Phil Race philip.race at oracle.com
Fri Aug 25 20:11:51 UTC 2017

I don't see that this changes the spec. in a way that needs a CSR.
So I'll review it but it is possible that you may be told it can be
withdrawn as unnecessary.

FYI I reviewed this mostly by reading the specdiff so I wasn't looking
directly at source only changes like line length.

I'm not sure how much I like or think some necessary,  a few changes such
as from "InputStream" to "input stream" and the like but I don't object
strongly enough to suggest they be amended ..

Minor nit in the change.

In DocFlavor I think "a string" would be better than "the string"

488 * @return the string representing a mime parameter, or {@code null} 
if that -phil.

On 08/24/2017 06:02 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
> Hello.
> CSR is created:
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8186753
> On 21.08.17 20:03, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
>> On 13.08.2017 23:23, Prasanta Sadhukhan wrote:
>>> In that case, will this be required to have 2nd part?
>>> 43 * {@link DocFlavor DocFlavor}
>>> There are manyof them in other files too like DocFlavor.java
>>> 1206 * stream ({@link java.io.Reader java.io.Reader} Other than 
>>> that, it looks ok to me (btw, I have not gone through each and every 
>>> file). 
>> The second part is needed(at least we use it) when the class name is 
>> used, but "{@link javax.print.attribute}" is a package.
>> If there are no more objections from others I'll create a CSR based 
>> on this webrev.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/attachments/20170825/37b9a792/attachment.html>

More information about the 2d-dev mailing list