Re[2]: The case for changing the documentation syntax

2019-07-09 Thread Nick Ramirez
It sounds like restructuredText and Asciidoc are the top choices. They both look capable: http://hyperpolyglot.org/lightweight-markup I can, as a next step, post this as an Issue on the Github project and it can be triaged and tracked. For something like this, it might even make sense to cre

Re: Re[2]: The case for changing the documentation syntax

2019-07-02 Thread Hugues Alary
And for comparison's sake, here's Asciidoc renders on github: https://github.com/asciidoctor/asciidoctor/blob/master/README.adoc Other features of the asciidoc/asciidoctor ecosystem are: - Asciidoc is also standardized - https://antora.org/ allows you to build 1 documentation website, from multipl

Re[2]: The case for changing the documentation syntax

2019-07-02 Thread Nick Ramirez
I found this page on Github. It uses reStructuredText and demonstrates how Github would render various elements out of the box. Of course, it can be made more visually appealing with other tools, but it's a free benefit that it renders on Github. https://gist.github.com/ionelmc/e876b73e2001acd

Re: Re[2]: The case for changing the documentation syntax

2019-07-01 Thread Hugues Alary
Adding my 2 cents here: I write documentation a lot and would like to mention the Asciidoc format, and more specifically asciidoctor ( https://asciidoctor.org/). Asciidoc is a _very_ powerful syntax yet extremely simple to use. Here's a link to their cheat sheet to give you a quick idea of the syn

Re[2]: The case for changing the documentation syntax

2019-07-01 Thread Nick Ramirez
Yes, either reStructuredText or Markdown would be okay. They both have a very intuitive syntax, so newcomers would pick it up and become productive with it quickly. It is quite easy to learn either one. -- Original Message -- From: "Aleksandar Lazic" To: "Nick Ramirez" ; "haproxy@for