On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 12:04 AM, Richard Gaskin <ambassa...@fourthworld.com> wrote: > > > We definitely need tagging in the Dictionary, something I'll be pushing for > as we finally get the ball rolling with the Community Documentation Team soon. > > With searchable tags anyone can add terms that will help others find relevant > tokens. > I appreciate this is a bit late to the game, and this Doc Team may already be heading in a certain direction, but I'm wondering if there's been an thought of adopting some kind of 'Industry Standard' docset format? Admittedly I didn't know that such a thing existed until I picked up an App called Dash as part of a bundle purchase:
https://kapeli.com/dash I didn't buy the bundle because of this app but when I looked into it I was very intrigued and from my limited fooling around with it I've got to say I'm very impressed. What is clear though is that out there there are a couple of docset standards: Supports AppleDoc docsets Supports Doxygen docsets Supports CocoaDocs docsets Supports Python / Sphinx docsets Supports Ruby / Yard docsets Supports Javadoc docsets Supports Scaladoc docsets Supports GoDoc docsets Supports Any HTML docsets Previously I've been of the opinion that the LC Dictionary should be a shining example of what can be done with LC - much like the old HC Dictionary. Unfortunately, currently it is not that. As I get older & lazier, I'm more of the opinion that one should avoid reinventing the wheel whenever possible. IMO, the Doc Team should either: 1) Go for a 100% LC built Dictionary that is a shining example of it's feature set = a lot of thought, planning and effort required. 2) Adopt a Docset format that can be used by 3rd Party Apps like Dash and requires a simple LC Docset Viewer = far less effort. For case 2 it would simply be a matter of the team investigating those various docsets and determining which provides the greatest flexibility, adaptability and feature set - a great time save as someone else has already done the hard yards developing a schema. A LC built Dictionary viewer would still need to be made but at least you've saved a lot of predevelopment time and hopefully avoided all the pitfalls some of the earlier implementations these other docsets may have suffered. It would mean that the LC Docset and LC Docset Viewer would not have to be created concurrently; the Docset could be created and viewable immediately by 3rd party apps whilst the inbuilt LC Dictionary Viewer is being worked on. I believe there might also be a bit of a knock on effect if developers using Python/Ruby/Java discover they can use the same Document Utility they are using to access the LC Docset. Just a thought. _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
