Re: [boost] [doc] Liven up Boost Documentation with Java Script?

Subject: Re: [boost] [doc] Liven up Boost Documentation with Java Script?
From: Paul Fultz II (pfultz2_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-02-24 14:59:44

On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 1:05:39 PM UTC-6, Robert Ramey wrote:
>
> On 2/24/16 10:16 AM, Paul Fultz II wrote: 
>
> >> I'm very familiar wiht Paul Fultz TICK library documentation and found 
> >> it to be unworthy of the underlying package.  Most of the problem is 
> the 
> >> text, reference, lack of examples, weak tutorial etc.  But the 
> >> presentation as a web page is quite different that the boost libraries. 
> >> It's jaring and not as effective.  There is also - as far as know 
> anyway 
> >> to produce a PDF version of the documentation.  This last is something 
> >> the Boost Documentation system can do - albiet reserved for those who 
> >> prefer to do their own dentistry. 
> >> 
> > 
> > The Tick library is "unworthy" of a formal review currently, and the 
> > documentation is lacking because I have been working on preparing the 
> > Boost.Fit library for formal review(which starts next week). 
>
> Fine, I like the TICK package and I think it will be much better if more 
> time can be invested in the documentation. 
>

Yes, of course, but I only have so much time right now. I do plan to invest
more time after the review of Boost.Fit, but it doesn't have to be a one-man
show. If you would like to contribute examples or tutorials, like what you
have in boost library incubator(or it could be original content), I would be
more than happy to integrate them into the documentation.
 

>
> > You can see the 
> > documentation for Boost.Fit here: 
> > 
> > http://pfultz2.github.io/Fit/doc/html/ 
> > 
> > It is much more complete with the boost look and feel, while being 
> generated 
> > using the same "underlying package" that both Boost.Tick and Boost.DI 
> uses. 
> > 
> > Also a PDF can be generated using `mkdocs2pandoc` tool. 
> > 
>
> My point is that there are two ways to go: 
>
> a) convince boost library developers to create a whole new markup for 
> their documentation so they can test/use your proposed infrastructure to 
> add commenting to their documentation. 
>
> b) make a small optional add-on to boost book using xslt which would 
> work with the markup they already have. 
>
> Now step back and consider which of the two strategies is more likely to 
> result in convincing boost library authors to experiment with including 
> commenting with their documentation? 
>

I am not proposing using some new markup nor I am not proposing that all 
boost
libraries jump ship to mkdocs either. There should be plenty of room for 
more
documentation tools for boost libraries.
 

>
> Robert Ramey 
>
>
> _______________________________________________ 
> Unsubscribe & other changes: 
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost 
>