Hello Nigel,
I don't think that Twiki is the right approach - I think we should keep 
this on the confluence wiki to make it easy to find and enhance.  This is 
more than internal documentation.  It not only helps developers build new 
OMAS APIs but also helps people to understand the philosophy behind them - 
which helps them consume the APIs.

When we talked about developing these standards I suggested that the 
development of the standards should be done through the Jiras - just like 
all our other design documentation and when we have some agreement then 
publish to the confluence wiki.  The publishing process can be iterative - 
but the contents of the wiki should be of a good quality rather than rough 
notes because it is our shop window for people looking to adopt our 
technology.

I thought you were going to use the review tool to gather standards 
together?  Alternatively, use a word doc linked to the Jira that people 
can mark up.

All the best
Mandy
___________________________________________
Mandy Chessell CBE FREng CEng FBCS
IBM Distinguished Engineer

Master Inventor
Member of the IBM Academy of Technology
Visiting Professor, Department of Computer Science, University of 
Sheffield

Email: [email protected]
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/mandy-chessell/22/897/a49

Assistant: Janet Brooks - [email protected]



From:   "Nigel Jones" <[email protected]>
To:     <[email protected]>
Date:   17/08/2017 09:15
Subject:        Twiki documentation



In https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ATLAS-2049 I am aiming to 
document some thoughts around standards for our new proposed OMAS 
interfaces. Since this is really internal documentation and tightly 
related to the code I think (and this was suggested by others too) that 
this should be added into the twiki structure in the source tree. That's 
fine and I'll do exactly that with discussion in ATLAS-2049

HOWEVER editing support for twiki is a little limited (for example there's 
no easy to use plugin for IntelliJ that I found), and though the format is 
a relatively simple markup, I wondered if better options might be to 
either go with:
* HTML - plenty of editor choice, some pages & api ref already are in this 
form
* markdown - this is increasingly becoming standard ie our README.md files

We don't have that much content in the twiki, and moving forward I do 
think it would be useful to extend/update with "reference" material, so it 
could be an opportune moment to consider what we'd like to do in future.

I'd err myself towards markdown as it preserves the simple text 
readability whilst being flexible and having simple editor support



Reply via email to