I definitely see your point, it doesn't look fancy to me. But, I would argue that Mathematica *does* have very "fancy" and accessible looking documentation, and I think accessibility and polish are what new users may base their choice on when deciding which CAS to use.
On Thursday, June 20, 2019 at 9:23:32 AM UTC-4, Kwankyu wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, June 19, 2019 at 9:31:05 PM UTC+9, saad khalid wrote: >> >> Hi all: >> >> The sage documentation hosted online (eg. >> http://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/reference/index.html ) looks very old. >> To me at least, it makes the software seem ancient, and I believe it puts >> off younger new users. The Cocalc interface for Sage maintains a modern >> looking aesthetic which makes it easy to show my peers (because it doesn't >> look that intimidating). I wish the documentation was the same way. Has >> there been any thought towards updating the look of the documentation? For >> example, we could use readthedocs (I believe this is the simplest option). >> Alternatively, we could use something like slate ( >> https://github.com/lord/slate) or a variety of other options. My >> question is, has this been considered and is there any obvious reasons to >> *not >> *do this? >> > > I am curious if the Python documentation looks fancy to you? > > https://docs.python.org/3.6/ > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-support" 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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-support. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-support/4ce7b57a-4b87-4b9a-84d5-821b6e3fc71f%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
