#5911: greatly improve the documentation one gets from Graph?
--------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Reporter: was | Owner: rlm
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-3.4.2
Component: graph theory | Keywords:
--------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Imagine a new user who wants to create a graph. They do {{{Graph?}}} and
they get (in order):
1. Two pages of parameters, which they can't possibly read through.
2. The first *page* of examples all involve networkx (they think -- huh?)
and starts like this.
{{{
EXAMPLES: We illustrate the first six input formats (the other two
involve packages that are currently not standard in Sage):
#. A NetworkX XGraph::
sage: import networkx
sage: g = networkx.XGraph({0:[1,2,3], 2:[4]})
sage: Graph(g)
Graph on 5 vertices
....
}}}
I propose:
1. Putting a few simple straightforward examples (which is all most
users need) right *before* the INPUT: block.
2. Moving any mention of networkx lower in the lists, e.g., when
defining the data input, don't put networkx first, and when documenting
things later with examples, don't put networkx first.
3. That one can do "graphs.<tab>" and get constructors for any family
of graphs should be noted clearly and prominently, also before the INPUT:
block. This is not even noted anywhere right now, though it is used in
two examples.
The above are all easy changes, I think.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/5911>
Sage <http://sagemath.org/>
Sage - Open Source Mathematical Software: Building the Car Instead of
Reinventing the Wheel
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
