On 2020-08-21 14:35 +0200, Nicolas George wrote: > 1. What would you think about putting the documentation for > libavfilter/vf_foobar.c into libavfilter/doc/vf_foobar.texi instead > of into huge doc/filters.texi (25k lines!)? And same for codecs, > formats, etc. > > We can adopt this for new documentation and move progressively > existing components.
IMHO it's the right thing to do. > 2. What would you think about switching from texinfo to a small basic > subset of HTML for new documentation? > > I think most of us are much more familiar with HTML syntax than with > texinfo. I would prefer Markdown or similar text like formats. Writing HTML by hand isn't so nice and reading the source is also a bit harder because of the tag syntax. > 3. What would you think about using pandoc for processing the > documentation? Would be an option. My experience withe pandoc is a bit dated, but it was working fine back then. IIRC the major advantage is, that it supports many output formats. When we have settled on a source format, we could maybe compare some alternatives. > 4. What would you think about including the documentation for components > into the libraries? It would allow GUI applications to present it in > dialog boxes, like spreadsheets do with their math functions. > > > (4 certainly depends on 2, because texinfo is nos suited for that use; > and probably in part on 1.) If we can efficiently embed it, that would cool. Even for CLI apps too. Alexander _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
