[Documentation] [TitleIndex] [WordIndex

camera_calibration/Reviews/2010-01-12_mihelich_Doc_Review

Reviewer: Patrick

Instructions for doing a doc review

See DocReviewProcess for more instructions

  1. Does the documentation define the Users of your Package, i.e. for the expected usages of your Stack, which APIs will users engage with?
    • From the main page it looks like calibrationnode's ROS API is the only thing users should be concerned about. Then the C++ code API page says the package has no code API, but the Python code API page lists a couple of classes with no disclaimer.

  2. Are all of these APIs documented?
    • Yes.
  3. Do relevant usages have associated tutorials? (you can ignore this if a Stack-level tutorial covers the relevant usage), and are the indexed in the right places?
    • There are tutorials for both mono and stereo calibration. Please put direct links to them on the main page.
  4. If there are hardware dependencies of the Package, are these documented?
    • A "Supported hardware" section would be nice, basically saying you require the standard ROS camera interface (image_raw & camera_info topics, set_camera_info service) and pointing to camera_drivers for examples.

  5. Is it clear to an outside user what the roadmap is for the Package?
    • No.
  6. Is it clear to an outside user what the stability is for the Package?
    • No.
  7. Are concepts introduced by the Package well illustrated?
    • N/A
  8. Is the research related to the Package referenced properly? i.e. can users easily get to relevant papers?
    • The main page should link to the OpenCV calibration page. OpenCV is linked in a couple other random places (stereo tutorial, Python docs).
  9. Are any mathematical formulas in the Package not covered by papers properly documented?
    • N/A

For each launch file in a Package

  1. Is it clear how to run that launch file?
  2. Does the launch file start up with no errors when run correctly?
  3. Do the Nodes in that launch file correctly use ROS_ERROR/ROS_WARN/ROS_INFO logging levels?

Concerns / issues

Conclusion

The GUI is quite nice but both it and the docs need some more polish before we can tell people "use this for your calibration needs."


2020-08-08 12:29