Michael Hudson wrote:
From my POV - just blue arrows HTML from reST would be hunky dory. I guess it might already be possible with judicious use of header, footer, and CSS. Perhaps I should investigate - more docutils directives to support documentation of python support would be a a definite plus as well though.Michael Foord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
A brief but resounding +1 to the idea of standardising Python doc
generation using docutils.
Are you talking about the existing Python documentation? Or just a way of making the "blue arrows" HTML from ReST?
The issue with the existing documentation is that it exists, and in latex...
Right - is Python documentation really written straight into LaTex markup ?
The python documentation is very nicely presented and *ought* to be
the standard style for people documenting third party modules. The
toolset to produce the documentation currently seems a bit arcane. I
may just be a luddite - but every time I've looked into it I've ended
up with a headache (although I've not put any degree of real effort
into it !).
On Unix with a working Latex installation, it's really easy (these days, now Latex2HTML is less of a pig to install).
Being able to write docs in reST and use docutils to produce them
sounds great. The *main* drawback will be that docutils doesn't yet
support multipage documents.
ISTR talk of a writer that wrote latex in the style of the existing Python documentation, which would get around that problem (but not the toolchain ones).
Hmm.. I haven't heard any talk of such a latex writer on docutils-users... at least not in the last year.
Best Regards,
Fuzzy http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python
Cheers, mwh
_______________________________________________ Doc-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/doc-sig
