> There should be a page with *step-by-step instructions,* with screenshots. Each step that is necessary for the installation, is necessary. The more time consuming and unpleasant such documentation might seem to be. . . well, the answer's in the question.
http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/sagemath/sage-mirror/win/index.html has a pretty prominent link to http://wiki.sagemath.org/SageAppliance which has a very early link to http://wiki.sagemath.org/SageApplianceInstallation in reading order. It is true, and I've suggested ideas before to Harald et al., that http://sagemath.org/download.html and various friends, putting the mirrors first instead of what you will *do* at the mirrors, is not very helpful. As pointed out elsewhere, very concrete wording suggestions are welcome. >> You make an arbitrary choice. You *pick* an editor, and a Tex >> installation, and you make it part of SAGE, because SAGE can't display math >> without it. >> > > This is just not true. Sage can display most run-of-the-mill math without > LaTeX, using jsMath (or in a release or two, MathJax). > > Other than that, my response to your diatribe is: rather than complain, > write a patch which improves the documentation. Also, discussions like this > belong on sage-devel, not sage-support. > > Concur on where this discussion belongs. A different response to the diatribe is to step back and note that although it isn't perfect, Sage is a lot more accessible to the non-command-line set than a lot of other FLOSS stuff (especially via things like sagenb.org), and intentionally so. -- To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URL: http://www.sagemath.org
