On 03/04/14 09:31, Ralf Hemmecke wrote:
No, of course, not. If that is done then we keep producing the mess we
have now. I would rather suggest that anyone who is interested to work
on improvement of the documentation, does that in public. I haven't yet
seen a concrete plan form anyone.
I would like to see a top level plan that shows how this fits into the
big picture, something like:
1) Convert boot code to SPAD.
2) Where possible replace SExpressions with higher level structures.
3) Write wrappers for Lisp calls in SPAD code
4) Remove unused domains and packages and ancient junk from SPAD code.
5) Go through remaining SPAD categories, domains and packages, one at a
time, gather all existing documentation from all sources and put it into
the form we choose.
6) Take categories, domains and packages out of pamphlet and put them in
spad files.
I would be willing to contribute to such a project if I thought it had a
good chance of success.
Looks like you are opting for the TeXmacs interface.
I must admit I have not tried it. But no, I think it would be best if
documentation was produced directly in web formats (html, svg, etc.).
Any editor you like can export to these files. I think diagrams are
important.
There is still the aspect of the dynamic part of HyperDoc,
I don't think a programme of work, like that above, would be practical
if you insisted on keeping dynamic documentation.
Martin
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FriCAS -
computer algebra system" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
