Hi Luc,

Absolutely, of course the preferred way is to build on something existing - 
but I was curious if someone had any other ideas.

For this implementation to be useful, I think we need at least tables, 
hyperlinks, and directives in general. So, is there anyone else who'd like 
to contribute ;) ?

Michael

On Tuesday, 13 December 2016 07:26:42 UTC+1, Luc Saffre wrote:
>
> Seikichi looks promizing. I would first try to join it. Yes, there is 
> some work to do, but you won't have less work if you start from scratch. 
>
> Luc 
>
> On 13/12/16 04:54, Michael Gielda wrote: 
> > Hi everyone, 
> > 
> > I wanted to spark up a discussion about reaching out further with Sphinx 
> > by an activity not strictly related to Sphinx development per se, but in 
> > my opinion in reality very much interdependent with the framework. 
> > 
> > Over the years using Sphinx I have found its use of reStructuredText 
> > mostly a blessing but also a little bit of a curse. It's a very powerful 
> > and extensible format, and as such very well suited to complex, 
> > technical documents. But some of its aspects are quite quirky (smaller 
> > problem), and most project/code management frameworks (GitLab, Redmine, 
> > GitHub, Bitbucket) that I use which for me double as 'online review 
> > frameworks' have limited support of it (bigger problem). That is, thanks 
> > to the availability of some ruby parsers, the support is there in 
> > general, but it's limited as opposed to Markdown, which is a first-class 
> > citizen on the Web. Notably, Sphinx roles are not supported anywhere, so 
> > any less "rSTy" and more "Sphinxy" type of documentation will render 
> > very badly anyway (or throw 'role not found' errors), reducing the 
> > usability of the parser in the first place. 
> > 
> > This is of course arguable, but I think that the reason for Markdown's 
> > popularity at least partly has been the plethora of JavaScript 
> > implementations which just made it spread over the web like a virus. Of 
> > course, it's great for short documents, but as soon as you add 
> > complexity, it just collapses (which is a shame but I've never been able 
> > to build anything bigger with Markdown). MkDocs is OK but I find Sphinx 
> > better feature- and stability-wise. 
> > 
> > It would be awesome to have some more Web support for Sphinx, and I 
> > believe this would happen if we had a simple yet extendible javascript 
> > parser where e.g. custom roles could be implemented. This would in turn 
> > spawn editors, IDEs, online tooling etc, which would popularise Sphinx 
> > itself. 
> > 
> > The online editor at http://rst.ninjs.org/ is nice as a demo but not 
> > really practical as it is not a client-side solution. 
> > AsciiDoctor has https://github.com/asciidoctor/asciidoctor.js which - 
> > even if a bit hacky (in the sense of being a conversion of the original 
> > code to JavaScript, not a reimplementation) - works quite well (see 
> > https://asciidoclive.com/edit/scratch/1). No server side code there as 
> > far as I can see. 
> > 
> > I haven't seen any advanced effort in that direction - the only project 
> > that addresses the problem (but does not solve it yet) is 
> > https://github.com/seikichi/restructured - it does offer basic support 
> > but the sheer number of empty tickboxes shows that there is still a 
> > long, long way to go. 
> > 
> > Of course, question is, why don't I write it myself. Answer: I'm no 
> > JavaScript guru, neither am I a seasoned parser writer - but I can 
> > assist in all sort of documentation, debug and testing activity, as 
> > probably can my team (we have tons of RST writeup we work with on a 
> > daily basis). [by the way - I had once tried converting the docutils 
> > code to js with a converter, but it's just huge... gave up quite quick] 
> > 
> > My question is, whether there are more like-minded people out there who 
> > too think this would be beneficial. Or perhaps I am omitting something 
> > important, or not understanding things well enough? 
> > Perhaps we could support seikichi, or spawn another, joint effort, at 
> > least loosely endorsed by the Sphinx community? 
> > 
> > Best regards, 
> > Michael 
> > 
> > -- 
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> > Groups "sphinx-users" group. 
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
> > an email to [email protected] <javascript:> 
> > <mailto:[email protected] <javascript:>>. 
> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] 
> <javascript:> 
> > <mailto:[email protected] <javascript:>>. 
> > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sphinx-users. 
> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sphinx-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sphinx-users.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to