Moshe Zadka <email@example.com>
Fri, 10 Nov 2000 18:59:16 +0200 (IST)
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, Tony J Ibbs (Tibs) wrote:
> HOWEVER. It seems clear to me that we deal with the things we can do now
> (more or less!) first (i.e., points d and e). Point c is debatably covered
> (via the Example or :: conventions). We can live with it for the moment.
> Points a and b are desirable, but we can live without them in the first
> instance if it means we get DOCUMENTATION started (which is, after all, the
> *most* important thing).
I disagree: until we settle points "a" and "b", it will be better to
document the standard library (and other modules) in LaTeX, rather then
ST-Py (tentative name). Until we redo the standard library, there
is little hope that others will pick this up.
> It looks like StructuredTextNG is meant to be designed so it can be
> "subclassed" for other purposes - at least that's a stated aim
Indeed, that's one of the things which pushed me over to ST.
Moshe Zadka <firstname.lastname@example.org> -- 95855124