[chuck-users] FLOSS (user editable) manual for ChucK
signal.automatique at gmail.com
Sat Nov 28 15:01:43 EST 2009
I don't think there is a need for all contributors to have to deal with
formatting of text. Something like very early html with headers, paragraph
breaks, a tag to indicate code and perhaps a few more things (but no fonts
and no colours) should do. That way a single designer (who need not be a
editor on the content level) could set appropriate fonts and related
settings for the whole thing in one swoop. Coherency is important here. I
see little benefit in letting everybody set their own font and think this
would make for a fatiguing read. Some people are very good at this and most
others don't really enjoy it so to me that seems like a easy choice.
Similarly, we'll need a standard for naming and indentation.
..so let's stick to that, but let's formalise it as that will save time
Ge's Thesis uses syntax highlighting for the code, while the manual doesn't.
I find the code in the thesis more easy on the eye. I think the thesis
follows the mini in highlighting, but it also seems to me that the mini's
highlighting is yet incomplete. Ge's thesis, as a file, is also much larger
than the current manual, btw, it's larger than the whole ChucK distribution.
Just some points of view.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the chuck-users