[REBOL] Re: Comments about make-doc-pro?
From: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 9-Aug-2001 14:30
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]On Behalf Of
> David Ness
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 4:35 AM
> To: [rebol-list--rebol--com]
> Subject: [REBOL] Re: Comments about make-doc-pro?
> I have several. Please read them in light of the fact that I know a
> fair amount about computing stuff in general, but not very much about REBOL in
> particular.
Hi, I have no problem with critic and/or suggestions. I know I'm way off from
holding the holy grahl for doing things right...
> Reading the code is fine, for documentation, but it doesn't give
> sufficient overview to actually make the process useful.
What process are you referring too?
> If you are not intending to supply further information, I'd make it more
extensive.
Sorry, I don't understand what you mean here...
> Also, I find it somewhat disconcerting that running your test text
> creates a live display that starts with `Heading 2' as though something had
been
> forgotten. I'd make the test both more productive and more descriptive.
Agreed. This really wasn't meant as test or demo, it was just the source I used
to test it... so no really educating intention.
> And while I understand using DE for German, I wonder if EN might not
> be more reasonable than US, although I suppose this could be some REBOL
`standard'
> that I don't know enough to understand yet.
Agreed, too. I'm going to change it.
> I don't get the role of `display' that automatically pops up in the browser,
> and whatever happens to %index.html. It also strikes me as a _very
> bad_ idea to destroy my index.html without so much as a by-your-leave, why
would I
> expect your code to do that?
Allready changed. The HTML file will now use the filename of the source file,
and for other files (using =file) the given filename.
> In most circumstances I want to be able to do something with the HTML
> that results from the translation, so I would much prefer that this be written
> into a file than that it appear `live'.
?? The output is written into a file ?? The generated HTML code is very dense
and doesn't provide a nice outline. How about adding a pretty-print feature?
> I assume you are probably familiar with `similar' attempts to deal
> with this problem. One
> of the better ones, IMO, is Todd Coram's `AFT' (Almost Free Text,
> which he did with some
> help from Ward Cunningham of Wiki and Extreme Programming fame). It is at
> http://www.maplefish.com/todd/aft.html and I would suggest you look
> carefully at it if you haven't alread done so. He implements many of
> the facilities you have implemented, as well as some that are on your `future'
list.
Yes, there is even the eText project from Andrew. We have discussed a lot about
all these things. But I wanted to keep the make-doc spirit and be compatible to
make-doc files, so that make-doc-pro might even adapted by Rebol Technologies.
Thanks for the comments. Robert
