[Doc-SIG] [Python-Dev] The docs, reloaded

[grubert at users.sourceforge.net]

> Hi Georg
> Super impressive work! :-)

looks very good, indeed

> I haven't looked at it in depth yet, but I have a question.  One
> concern from a long thread on Doc-Sig a long time ago, is that ReST
> did not at the time possess the ability to nicely markup the objects
> as LaTeX macros do.   Is your transformation losing markup information
> from the original docs?  e.g. are you still marking classes as classes
> and functions as functions in the ReST source, or is it converting
> from qualified markup to "style" markup (e.g., to generic literals
> instead of class/function/variable/keyword argument docutils roles,
> etc.).    If you solved that problem, how did you solve it?  Is the
> resulting ReST pretty?  Do you think we can build a better index?
>
> My beef with using ReST for documentation, as much as I like ReST, is
> that unless we have roles and structure for declaring functions,
> classes, etc. it would remain inferior to the LaTeX macros, which in
> spite of being LaTeX, qualify the kinds of objects to some extent.

i thought the libctypes documentation in 2.5 was done with
the docpy-writer, but i might be completely wrong.

cheers

--