Hello, I think that the best way is to put command syntax description just before its definition in the context file. This way it will be easier to keep it always in sync with the code. And most important point here is that it must be in sync always. If it is, then we can just generate cont-en.xml and other cont-xx.xml files, but also have a syntax checker!
Just imagine: context --check-syntax myfile.tex shows you which options or commands are experimental, deprecated, and which are unrecognized, and suggests the command or option to fix that. What do you think? Regards, Marius On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 8:11 PM, Wolfgang Schuster <schuster.wolfg...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Am 23.06.10 09:35, schrieb Peter Münster: >> >> On Wed, Jun 16 2010, Wolfgang Schuster wrote: >> >>> >>> i plan to update cont-en.xml with changes in mkiv (new keys and commands) >>> >> >> Hello Wolfgang, >> >> Since Hans said "documentation about tex can best be done in tex", I've >> put >> my ideas into some files here: >> >> http://pmrb.free.fr/tmp/context-commands/ >> >> What do you think about that? >> > > I agree that tex is the best tool to document tex but cont-en.xml is only > a tool to help in the documentation and i can't see a big advantage to > rewrite it in pure tex. The explanation for the keys/options is another > thing but they are not what i'm working on. > > My files are now available here: http://bitbucket.org/wolfs/setup > > Wolfgang > > > > _______________________________________________ > dev-context mailing list > dev-context@ntg.nl > http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/dev-context > _______________________________________________ dev-context mailing list dev-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/dev-context
