Richard Nuttall wrote: > > Michael Lazzaro wrote: > > >Here's some notes based on the first bits of feedback -- something to > >throw rocks at, as it were. > > > > > >"The overall project goal is to produce documentation that will:" > > > >(1) define precise semantics for the Perl6 language; discover and > >document ambiguous possible behaviors and report them to the design team > >(Allison, Dan, Damian, Larry) for review and decisions. > > > >(2) provide detailed test cases allowing Perl6 implementors and the QA > >team to verify functionality as it is written. > > > >(3) encourage community interest and participation in Perl6, growing the > >community and the manpower available to implement the language. > > > How (if at all) does this project link into the internal documentation > of the coding team ? > It would be nice to be consistent, and allow the links to work across > that boundary > if possible.
I think we should probably have them suggest an approach to us... obviously, most of the internal documentation can best be handled by the people coding it, as long as they remember to do it. :-) So I'm not sure of where the line is there, in terms of what might be helpful to them, and what might not be. The only thing I've been hearing most resoundingly from them is that they want test cases. That's probably something we can do well, if we're writing the documentation for a section and the tests that verify that functionality at the same time. If any perl6-internals people here have suggestions or requests, please let us know. MikeL
