On 25 May 2010 03:27, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis@gmail.com> wrote:
So we still touch raw HTML? That's a little painful.
Not really, HTML has excellent tool support. Several developers want to use WYSIWYG editors.
Even the web designers/developers I know are moving to haml [0] which is a lot friendlier for people writing code which eventually gets turned into HTML by some processor.
We can't really expect people to learn another technology and install another toolset. I think you need to understand HTML in order to use haml anyway.
There are also other tools like Jekyll [1] and Sphinx [2] which deal with Markdown and Restructured Text respectively to generate nice static web sites.
The website predates both tools. Hyde would be a better choice than Jekyll since Python is preferred round here. I'd be a little worried about how flexible they are.
I agree, and it would be nice if we would use something like Wordpress MU so that we can have library maintainers manage their own sub-sites.
I'm trying not to be the voice of pessimism, but I don't think that's feasible. Library maintainers already have enough of a workload, and several libraries don't even have maintainers.
I'm still toying around with whether a web-based forum ala StackOverflow would work on a per-library basis as well, which can be a totally independent feature should library maintainers want them for their own sites or not.
Why not just use StackOverflow? Since they've recently announced an API, it might be possible to integrate it into the site in some manner. Daniel