Hi all I have recently made some Intellisense documentation for MooTools, but I doubt that Visual Studio documentation is the best way to spend my time - there is undoubtedly more popular editors used by MooTools developers - there must be a lot of Aptana, Dreamweaver, and Coda users, to name just a few of the IDEs we all use. I would rather spend it on a parser to provide docs for all IDEs.
One of the main points of feedback I've received from making the Intellisense is that it would be awesome if we could get a consistent 'documentation API' so we can really easily access documentation, and rather than rolling our own static docs, spend the time (which can be a lot of time just rewriting a flavour of MooTools) writing a parsing engine (mmm, regular expressions) that parses a unified doc file. To the core developers, do you still use Natural Docs? I remember a while back (maybe 1.1?) it said 'powered by Natural Docs' somewhere on the page. We use that where I work because when I make an addition to our company library, I just document the JS file and we're done. Which is great! If so, I can write a regexp parser that will represent that as an XML document, or JSON format - the only problem with that is that we'd also need an indication of inheritance too. If you make a custom build of Core, or more likely, More, it needs to pick this up and present a representative doc file. Maybe an accompanying XML file, hosted somewhere on mootools.net? Am well up for an open discussion for this. I know that when I mentioned the fact that jQuery had support for Intellisense at the company I worked for, their jaw dropped, and it's a big selling point, hence why I wrote a Moo equivalent, because I love the moo...now there's no excuse :) It would be awesome if we could provide MooTools support for all the major IDEs - it would be even more awesome if we can come up with a good way to support cross-IDE documentation for ALL javascript frameworks!
