Comment 4 for bug 364267

I totally agree

Daniel Bültmann wrote:
> I also share Jan's view. We should include all classes regardless of
> whether they are documented or not.
> I also like it to have browsable source code of each class to view it
> online. Often the best documentation
> is the source code itself ;). And in our case the source code ist mostly
> the only documentation that is available ;)
>
>
> Jan schrieb:
>
>> OK, I see that the alphabetical list of all classes shows much more.
>> However, if I build the documentation from a vanilla openwns-sdk with
>> doxygen 1.5.3, I see all the available namespaces on that page and I
>> prefer it this way.
>>
>> The situation is the same for the list of all classes, only documented
>> classes are shown. Imagine a user is looking for information about the
>> beamforming antenna. He will only find
>> wns::service::phy::ofdma::BeamForming because this is listed due to its
>> short annotation. What he will not find - and maybe that's what he was
>> really looking for - is rise::antenna::Beamforming. Note that the page
>> exists on docs.openwns.org
>> (http://docs.openwns.org/api/classrise_1_1antenna_1_1Beamforming.htm)
>> but simply isn't linked.
>>
>> In my opinion it is confusing to hide classes that actually exist just
>> because they do not have this short text description. But that's just my
>> 2cents.
>>
>>
>>
>
>