Smylers skribis 2007-06-21 21:33 (+0100): > That doesn't follow. It's an opinion.
> I disagree. perldoc.perl.org was started by JJ, gained popularity, and > then got awarded the official blessing of the onion. Over the years > there have many several sites with Perl documenation. That's not a way of documenting things, it's "just" an interface to existing documentation. It provides no semantic search featurewhatsoever, and can't, because Perl's documentation wasn't built like that. The documentation for CGI is very different from the documentation for IO::Socket::INET, although both are (can be) OO. That's okay if you read the things like a book, but structured documentation with structured interfaces allow readers to more easily use the documentation for reference. > Let the same thing happen with Perl 6: allow innovation, and if you, or > Markov, or anybody creates a particularly fine site then people will > admire it, use it ... and then perhaps it can be made official. Sure, but it's a huge chicken-egg problem that doesn't have to exist. > There isn't really anything to be gained by pre-empting this and picking > something initially. I disagree very strongly. -- korajn salutojn, juerd waalboer: perl hacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://juerd.nl/sig> convolution: ict solutions and consultancy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
