On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 11:29:06 AM UTC+9, saad khalid wrote: > > 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. >
To me, the Python documentation looks better than the Mathematica documentation, in terms of readability. But I think this is just personal preference. Anyway, definitely the Sage documentation needs to be improved, and I guess no one does not want to stick to the present state. You are welcome to try other options. There is no reason not to. -- 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/dd4996fa-28ed-4408-896d-ead57da630bd%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
