Hi all,

Apologies for the delay in following up on the documentation conversation. I 
was away from work for a couple of weeks.

This week, I have been working on some GitHub and DocPad interoperability to 
enable us to view the documentation in both the GitHub source view and rendered 
with DocPad. I've updated my https://github.com/simonbates/infusion-docs-docpad 
with the following:

- Pages are now call Page.md rather than Page.html.md
- I have in place regular expression replacement of links (some details below) 
so that we can use link targets of Page.md in our markdown pages -- when viewed 
on GitHub, these links will work, and when rendered with DocPad, the links will 
be replaced with Page.html

My thinking here is that there is some value in being able to view the 
documentation, follow links, and edit through the GitHub UI as well as locally 
with DocPad. Now, I can imagine that we might adopt functionality in the future 
that is DocPad (or other documentation/site generator) specific because it 
offers us something that GitHub cannot do -- and that functionality would not 
render consistently across GitHub and our final generated docs. But, I think 
that that can evolve with time and that if our base situation is that the docs 
are viewable both on GitHub and with the generator, we are in a good place to 
start.

You can view my DocPad version of the docs here: 
https://github.com/simonbates/infusion-docs-docpad/blob/master/src/documents/index.md

I'd like to propose the following path forward:

1. We continue our conversion process as we have been doing so far, adding docs 
to https://github.com/fluid-project/infusion-docs
2. In parallel, I will maintain the DocPad version of the docs at 
https://github.com/simonbates/infusion-docs-docpad which we will use for testing
3. We go ahead and start on some design and templating/styling for the docs
4. Once we are happy with the DocPad version of the docs, we update the main 
infusion-docs repo

Please let me know if you have thoughts.

As mentioned above, here are some notes on the link replacement. I'm using this 
regular expression for link replacement: 
content.replace(/(<a\s[^>]*href="[\w]+)\.md(["#])/gm, '$1.html$2') Please have 
a look at it and see if you can see any issues. I'm aiming to be conservative 
to start and the expression will very likely need expanded in the future (for 
example it won't handle links with "/" or ".." currently) but I'd like to do 
that as needed.

Thanks,
Simon

-----Original Message-----
From: Colin Clark [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 4:39 PM
To: Tony Atkins
Cc: Bates, Simon; [email protected]
Subject: Re: Infusion-docs with DocPad

Hi Tony,

On May 29, 2014, at 6:56 AM, Tony Atkins <[email protected]> wrote:

> Why is markdown so important?  The main risk in my opinion of using a static 
> site generator is that we could shrink our circle of contributors to just 
> developers, or worse, just developers familiar with our stack.  As long as we 
> keep markdown (or GFM) for the raw document format, we can pretty safely 
> assume that most developers are very familiar with the format.  There are 
> also a range of tools that non-developers can use to edit markdown.  In the 
> "how to work with this" instructions in the README, I would include markdown 
> editor details along side the docpad instructions for devs and site 
> maintainers.

I'm glad you highlighted the issue of ensuring that contributing to our 
documentation is easy and within reach for non-developers. It's really question 
of the right tool for the job. The Infusion framework documentation is written 
by technical people for an audience of developers, so I think it's quite 
reasonable to use a Markdown, Git, and static site generator workflow. It 
certainly gives us a lot more flexibility in terms of styling, embedding code 
examples and demos, and a lot more simplicity from the system administrator 
perspective.

But for other types of resources, we should make sure that the barrier to 
contribution is very, very low. That's where a wiki is probably most 
appropriate. I'm thinking about things like, say, the Inclusive Learning Design 
Handbook or work documents such as proposals, architecture planning, etc. These 
should remain in the wiki so that anyone can quickly and smoothly contribute.

Colin
_______________________________________________________
fluid-work mailing list - [email protected]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
see http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work

Reply via email to