Util.tree ?element function example inconsistent with its signature in the documentation (?)

[OndrejPopp]

Hello Anton,
I have just been reading about the parser documentation and it appears to me that the application of the element function is inconsistent with its signature,

So,
?element:(name -> (name * string) list -> 'a list -> 'a)
is a function of three arguments producing 'a

but it is used as,
~element:(fun (name, _) children -> Element (name, children))

which appears to be a function of only two arguments, the tupple (name, _) and children,

See here for the original piece of documentation,
kind regards,
Ondrej

val tree :
?text:(string list -> 'a) ->
?element:(name -> (name * string) list -> 'a list -> 'a) ->
?comment:(string -> 'a) ->
?pi:(string -> string -> 'a) ->
?xml:(xml_declaration -> 'a) ->
?doctype:(doctype -> 'a) ->
([< signal ], sync) stream -> 'a option
This function's type signature may look intimidating, but it is actually easy to use. It is best introduced by example:
type my_dom = Text of string | Element of name * my_dom list

"

HTML5 is easy to parse".
|> string
|> parse_html
|> signals
|> tree
~text:(fun ss -> Text (String.concat "" ss))
~element:(fun (name, _) children -> Element (name, children))

[aantron]

This was actually fixed in #50, and is now

markup.ml/src/markup.mli

Lines 554 to 561 in e1aed3c

	"<p>HTML5 is <em>easy</em> to parse"
	|> string
	|> parse_html
	|> signals
	|> tree
	~text:(fun ss -> Text (String.concat "" ss))
	~element:(fun (_ns, name) _attrs children -> Element (name, children))
	]}

The issue is that Markup.ml's doc generation script is currently broken, and as I haven't gotten around to fixing it, I haven't been able to post accurate docs lately (almost all the docs are still accurate, though). I opened #62 to remind myself to get on it! I'm closing this issue in the meantime.

[OndrejPopp]

Ok, tx Anton! 😃