|
|
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| Each scripting command should be properly categorized to make navigation easier. I suggest following categories:
| | Discussion content moved to [[Scripting]] - Discussion |
| | |
| [[:Category:Scripting Commands]] Each scripting command goes here | |
| | |
| [[:Category:Scripting Commands OFP 1.97]] If command is available in OFP 1.97, it goes here.
| |
| | |
| [[:Category:Scripting Commands OFP 1.46]] If command is available in OFP 1.46, it goes here.
| |
| | |
| [[:Category:Scripting Commands ArmA]] If command is available in ArmA, it goes here.
| |
| | |
| Note: one command can (and most often will) be present in more categories.
| |
| | |
| I have implemented this in one article to show how it can be done: [[count]]
| |
| | |
| Once those categories are implemented, the page [[Scripting Reference]] could be deleted or it could be replaced by links to corresponding categories.
| |
| | |
| -----
| |
| Making the list for OFP up to version 1.46 and a list for OFP up to version 1.97 won't be too difficult, however, making a list for ArmA will be difficult, as we have no access to such a list, nor the definitions of new commands and relevant changes to old commands.
| |
| | |
| If we had such a list we might manage that better ;)
| |
| | |
| Planck
| |
| | |
| -----
| |
| Off course, I assume nobody outside BIS can make sure ArmA list is accurate. A good starting point could be to assume all 1.97 commands are still present in ArmA. We will add new commands and remove obsolete ones later on.
| |
| | |
| --[[User:Suma|Suma]] 15:07, 19 April 2006 (CEST)
| |
| | |
| ----- | |
| | |
| Ok, that sounds fair enough. :)
| |
| | |
| Planck
| |
| | |
| == Command case mismatch in the examples ==
| |
| | |
| A lot of examples contain mismatches case in command links. To find them efficiently use [[Special:Wantedpages]] - when you see a command there, click on the number of links and you will see which pages are referencing the command by using bad case. Fixing it is then easy.
| |
| | |
| --[[User:Suma|Suma]] 16:32, 21 April 2006 (CEST)
| |
