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

Migrate Documentation to ReadTheDocs #9

Closed
jqnatividad opened this issue Jan 13, 2016 · 3 comments
Closed

Migrate Documentation to ReadTheDocs #9

jqnatividad opened this issue Jan 13, 2016 · 3 comments

Comments

@jqnatividad
Copy link
Contributor

Right now, its maintained here - https://api.cityofnewyork.us/geoclient/v1/doc

As the community contributes to the project, that will necessarily require contributing documentation changes in their PRs, and the docs be in GH.

I'm guessing this is in the v2.0 reorg?

@mlipper
Copy link
Member

mlipper commented Jan 13, 2016

The docs are there because the geoclient web app itself also serves HTML mediaTypes in addition to JSON and XML: i.e., originally, Geoclient auto-generated a base set of static files by parsing the Geosupport Uinversal Programming Guide and spitting it out as HTML. I added some stuff for the GC single field search functionality which is not built into GS. Version information content dynamic and comes from calling the built-in "/version.[json|xml]" endpoint.

For 2.0, we were thinking about getting rid of most of this since the bulk of it is just the documentation for Geosupport itself. As such, it is slightly out-of-date and, unless we can work with DCP to come up with an automated feed/pipeline of their docs, will always be that way.

We were discussing whether to replace it with some lightweight swagger-generated forms to allow people to submit test requests interactively and then add links to DCP once their HTML version is available on the web. We'd still supply GC version info and document GC service endpoints.

What do you think?

@jqnatividad
Copy link
Contributor Author

Oh cool! Swagger is even better!

@mlipper
Copy link
Member

mlipper commented Jan 19, 2016

Please see #11 and #12 which are related to this issue

@mlipper mlipper closed this as completed Jan 19, 2016
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