These should probably go into JIRA so they can be tracked. Only question is do they belong in the Qt Websites section (like the rest of devnet) or in the docs section? I guess it doesn’t matter as long as they are reported. The assignee can always move them.

They should belong in the devnet section because of the developer.qt.nokia.com URL.

Reported here:

http://bugreports.qt.nokia.com/browse/QTWEBSITE-245

Marius gave a comment on the launch of the devnet docs here :

http://developer.qt.nokia.com/blog/view/the_qt_documentation_notably_new_features

As i understand it’s ok to report broken links here in the beta testing section. The trolls will pick it up from here. This makes reporting missing links much easier, so more people could contribute.

While we are working out the initial set of bugs everything can be reported here or in JIRA under the developer.qt.nokia.com component. The Qt web team will sort/triage this in any case.

When the doc feature matures, our task this summer, I’ll ask that bugs in the actual documentation (the API ref, the examples, the demos etc.) gets reported in JIRA under the doc.qt.nokia.com component. While bugs in the devnet implementation of the documentation (the frame around it, doc notes, tag/rating, search, docmarks, performance) is reported as now.

The reason for this is that we are two teams working together to get the documentation out: the Qt Doc team for the actual documentation (the biggest task by far!) and the Qt Web team for the online implementation.

Thanks Marius to elaborate on this. There was some confusion here about reporting errors in the devnet docs.

It’s all clear now.