[Doc-SIG] DocStrings 0.3: Suggestion for documentation syntax (very long)

[Jack Jansen]

Recently, Moshe Zadka <moshez@math.huji.ac.il> said:
> In short, what I want (and I think deserve) is more then people saying
> "Yuck!" -- I want to see if version 0.4 can be better. 

Moshe,
I'll start with "sorry!!!", because my previous mail could probably
also be interpreted as little more than "Yuck!", but it definitely
wasn't intended so!

I appreciate the work you've put into this, and I
think the outcome probably matches the various goals you've set (like
XML compatability while being more readable), but I'm not sure I agree 
with those goals, or at least with the way the examples seem to go. As
I explained in a previous message, to me docstrings should be
easy-write, easy-read, and in no way a replacement for True
Documentation.
--
Jack Jansen             | ++++ stop the execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal ++++
Jack.Jansen@oratrix.com | ++++ if you agree copy these lines to your sig ++++
www.oratrix.nl/~jack    | see http://www.xs4all.nl/~tank/spg-l/sigaction.htm