Fixes: brief description in detailed if there is no detailed description; change the Detailed Description header level

[DmitriyMarin]

This PR fixes two issues:

• No brief description in detailed output for members if there is no detailed description #113
• The level of the "Detailed Description" header in the member.jinja2 template. It should be the 2nd level header and not the 1st level header since only the title can be the 1st level header and this breaks the table of contents.

Summary by Sourcery

Fix the incorrect usage of brief description in the property module and adjust the header level of 'Detailed Description' in the member.jinja2 template to ensure proper document structure.

Bug Fixes:

• Fix the issue where a brief description was incorrectly used instead of a detailed description in the property module.

Enhancements:

• Change the header level of 'Detailed Description' in the member.jinja2 template from a first-level header to a second-level header to maintain consistency with the document structure.

[sourcery-ai]

Reviewer's Guide by Sourcery

This pull request addresses two issues: it modifies the property.py file to use the brief description when there is no detailed description, and it adjusts the header level for the "Detailed Description" section in the member.jinja2 template.

File-Level Changes

Change	Details	Files
Change the XML element used to check for description presence	Replace 'detaileddescription' with 'briefdescription' in the XML find method This change affects the 'has' method of an unnamed class	mkdoxy/property.py
Adjust the header level for the 'Detailed Description' section	Change the header from level 1 (#) to level 2 (##) This modification ensures proper hierarchy in the document structure	mkdoxy/templates/member.jinja2

---

Tips

• Trigger a new Sourcery review by commenting @sourcery-ai review on the pull request.
• Continue your discussion with Sourcery by replying directly to review comments.
• You can change your review settings at any time by accessing your dashboard:
  • Enable or disable the Sourcery-generated pull request summary or reviewer's guide;
  • Change the review language;
• You can always contact us if you have any questions or feedback.

[sourcery-ai]

Hey @DmitriyMarin - I've reviewed your changes - here's some feedback:

Overall Comments:

• Consider adding a brief comment in property.py explaining the rationale for switching from 'detaileddescription' to 'briefdescription'. This will help with future maintenance and understanding of the code.
• It would be beneficial to include tests that verify the behavior remains correct after changing from 'detaileddescription' to 'briefdescription' in the has() method.

Here's what I looked at during the review

• 🟢 General issues: all looks good
• 🟢 Security: all looks good
• 🟢 Testing: all looks good
• 🟢 Complexity: all looks good
• 🟢 Documentation: all looks good

---

Sourcery is free for open source - if you like our reviews please consider sharing them ✨

• X
• Mastodon
• LinkedIn
• Facebook

_{Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment to tell me if it was helpful.}