image_common/Reviews/6-10-2009 Blaise_Doc_Review
Reviewer: Blaise Gassend
Instructions for doing a doc review
See DocReviewProcess for more instructions
- Does the documentation define the Users of the Stack, i.e. for the expected usages of the Stack, which APIs will users engage with?
No. Not clear that this is needed at the Stack level, but it is lacking in the camera_calibration_parsers documentation. Looking at the stack page, it is not apparent that there is a C++ library in addition to the command line tools.
- Are all of these APIs documented?
Yes
- Do relevant usages have associated tutorials?
I think that camera_calibration_parsers is simple enough not to need a tutorial.
Have all Packages in the Stack been API reviewed?
Yes
Does the Stack conform to the StackDocumentation guidelines?
Yes
- Are there Packages in the Stack that don't belong
No
Concerns / issues
Notes:
- I have only reviewed the stack documentation and the documentation for camera_calibration_parsers.
- Please look at the comments above in addition to the ones below.
Stack:
- - The stack tutorials page does not exist. It should have links to all the stack tutorials. (Once the page is created this happens automagically by putting the right tags in the tutorial pages) - The troubleshooting page should exist, even if it just tells folks to see the package troubleshooting pages. - Should the stack description mention that these are packages that do not have an opencv dependency? This would help justify this stack's existence. Not sure how useful this is; just a thought.
camera_calibration_parsers:
- - I think that the troubleshooting page should contain a sentence saying that there are currently no failure modes that warrant a troubleshooting entry, rather than just being blank.
