RhinoCommon API with Comment function via.hypothes.is

Did somebody else thought about using hypothes.is to share Annotations in the RhinoCommon API ?


some nice features like groups, ranking, etc…

shall we give it a try ?

and even annotate this side :wink:


Hi Tom,

I’m not sure what the question is here. Can you explain further?

– Dale

dear Dale - thanks for asking.
I like the idea of having a RhinoCommon-Documentation, that allows comments by the users - or links to this forum or vice versa. as the current documentation does not have this functionality - you can just use hypothes.
see the small annotation sidebar of above s link.

the question “shall we give it a try” was more addressed to other users - then to the mcneel stuff. But maybe you might like the idea as well.

best tom

@dan, do you have any thoughts on this?

I don’t think we as “McNeel” should do anything about this. It is up to the users to use this system if they choose, but we will have no control over the commenting system.

I agree with Steve. I would only hope that - if the system is useful to those who try it out - they make sure to bring the most helpful comments to our attention (as we may not be aware of what is going on sometimes). If there is something wrong with the documentation, we need to hear about it …by whatever communication channel is best, though we prefer here.

I know that my goal - and I think others here would share it - is to make the canonical documentation (guides, samples, api references) as useful as possible “out-of-the-box.”

@dale @dan @stevebaer
thanks for your discussion. I came across this idea because i searched for a possibility to remember stuff with certain entries in the api reference. Let me give an example:
I was checking for discontinuity
The option i needed i found in Dales answer here

But enum 12 is not in the rhinocommon documentation.
It would be great to have a way, that (final) results from this forum get a proper place to be easily accessible. maybe with a (auto-generated) link list - “related topics in discourse”?

Hi guys,

That’s an annoying bug. We should fix it, hopefully soon. In this particular case, I think it should also not be documented. I put it on my list: RH-37054. In general, when such an “magic-number” advice is given, we should try to track it on youtrack and see what we can do about it.

This does not mean that some way of wiki-documenting the API might not be useful.

This enum is included in the WIP…

Oh, I see.