On Tuesday, 10 June 2014 at 11:09:23 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 June 2014 at 10:42:14 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
* Are there any other opinions on this? I remember that there
have been some strong proponents of using DDOC for things, so
it would be bad if in the end Markdown were to be dropped,
after all of the work has already been done. Personally I'd
strongly favor Markdown, though.
DDOC was promoted because of dog-fooding rationale but I
believe it has unacceptable learning curve and negatively
impacts documentation contribution.
I think the key advantage for Markdown is that it's well
understood by a larger community, (GitHub, Stack Overflow,
Reddit, etc.) so it would likely encourage contribution to
editing pages on the website. It's also just has very nice syntax
for writing articles with, although I know how frustrating it is
to write a parser for it. (You have to accept stuff which is
sometimes HTML, sometimes not.)
The library documentation will still be DDoc generated, as that's
the best tool for that, just styled differently.
