Proposal: structure documentation on Rocq website according to Diátaxis #26
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
I agree that the first page should reference different tutorial etc... Equations:
Maybe we should organize a coq specific call to talk about that with people interested |
…r the Tour of Rocq.
Still requires some manual tweaking of the HTML generated by Alectryon: - identifiers generated by coqdoc are unrelated to the titles and need to be changed - document should start with a h2 or a p - some empty pre should be removed Also introduce support for listing the authors of a tutorial.
|
Closing in favor of the alternative that was discussed at yesterday's meeting (PR forthcoming). |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I'm convinced that most of the documentation that we want to add on the Rocq website should come from Platform Docs. Thus, it doesn't make sense to have a single tab dedicated to it. It also doesn't fit the slicing by experience levels, since it already covers all experience levels.
In other words, I don't think the OCaml.org structure makes sense for us and I propose to separate the tab structure from the levels.
This is very WIP (not ready to merge) based on #22.
I'm opening the PR just to show what this would look like.
Tabs:
Levels:
Beginners (the get started button would direct here):
Intermediate:
There could be something similar for advanced level, and probably some of the items that I put should be moved to a different level.