World: r4wp

I'm trying the github Windows client, which should sync, but only 
have my fork in it right now. I thought the target workflow (in general) 
was to fork, push to that, then submit a pull request. My problem 
is spending little time on it, then letting it sit idle while it 
leaks out of my brain.

Yeah, fork + push to fork + pull request is one typical contribution 
workflow.

However, if you just want to follow along with the updates, then 
you don't need your own fork and can just sync a local clone of Nenad's 
repository.

But I should fork+push+pull-req if I want to, say, add comments to 
%boot.red.

Yep.

I don't want red docs, I want black&white ones :-)

My take is as follows:


- I like REBOL Word Browser - it contains even examples, is then 
easy to produce runnable examples (Easy VID), allows comments

- REBOL reference manual is good enough. I can't see any advantages 
with Clojure etc. - imo no need to copy anyone - just make a structures, 
which allow you to register related functionalities, add comments, 
examples

- I agree with Doc, that first Doc which should appear is some guide, 
which leads you via introduction to language, its main ideas and 
concepts, etc.
- word reference shoudl be auto generated imo .....

I thought of the Word Browser as well Petr, and agree with your comments. 
On ClojureDocs, though, my thought is that the main structure is 
the auto-generated part, and the comments and examples are added 
to that.

That might work. I wonder about some functionality removal - what 
happens with related docs then? Is there going to be any versioning? 
Some good notes might be lost that way ...

Marking things as obsolete, and/or moving them to an archive area 
makes sense.

I don't have a preference for format, but I think some way to cross 
reference related functions is critically important.  Reference documentation 
is essential, with extensive examples, then with that in place, cross 
reference links are a natural way to explore language functions. 
 It's natural to think "How do I..." when learning, and exploring 
related functionality is an intuitive way to learn.  Once function 
reference, examples and cross reference links are done, then a cookbook 
is a natural step, and then various tutorials aimed at different 
levels and interests.

The online REBOL dictionary and the Word Browser are both effective 
formats for cross referencing.  Something like Carl's REBOL manual 
is essential to get things started.

A wiki seems like the best way to get community help collecting examples 
of function use.

A wiki lowers the barrier to contribute, best would be if it were 
possible to import the added pearls to the 'official' docs.

Don't know if you know http://learnyousomeerlang.com/and where it 
was derived from http://learnyouahaskell.com/that kind of a site 
would be cool for REBOL/Red.

Should this group not be public?

No problem for making it public.

Not sure if this is enough. Changed the title.

On docs, in one of my dreams, I see another category along with Example 
and See Also: Tests. Make it easy for people to contribute tests 
(and expected results).

Agree that examples are a must have. I see way too many reference 
sites that just show an API along with a brief description. Even 
when these are very nicely presented, they leave me wanting. Seeing 
an APIs in action makes a huge difference to me, but of course the 
work of creating examples should come from the community.

Gregg, that's a good dream and very meaning for learning. The figuring 
out of why something doesn't work is so powerful especially when 
one thinks it should.

<from #Red>

A document would be trickier as you'd need to manage line spacing, 
paragraph spacing, splitting paragraphs/docs over pages.

Yes, it managed only a single page, and yes, the hard part is flow 
of paragraphs across pages, not generating multiple pages in itself.

(that'd be page breaks, indeed)

You'd need to be able to measure as you go...

I'd still think that doing it in the graphics engine is simpler than 
in PDF. For R3, someone is probably going to do it anyway.

and I hope DRAW or similar will be available for Red.

It will

cool :-)

Kaj - sounds like sure thing but also news for me :-) AFAIK you and 
Doc were not much interested in bringing View to Red. Well, unless 
you mean DRAW equivalent done using different engine ...

Pekr: DRAW is a dialect for 2D vector drawings.