On 2010-01-12, eegg wrote: > A conclusion I've come to is that reST/sphinx can potentially provide > a *complete* replacement of things like OpenOffice.org. In other > words, I've found them to be ideal for the production non-technical > documents. I see reST/sphinx as a friendly plaintext formatting > language providing an alternative to TeX and the like (of which I'm > not a massive fan).
Things missing for to be useful in science, engineering and arts: * citation/references support * mathematics (available as extension) > Which brings me to my question: is there no interest in using tools > like sphinx in this regard, and if not, why? It seems architecturally > odd to me that both reST and sphinx provide many things which will > only be of use to code documentation. While Sphinx is build specifically for Python standard documentation, reST is a generic markup language (and the Docutils_ reference implementation lacks many of the code-doc specific Sphinx extensions). > So a second question: would it make more sense to anyone else out > there if the sphinx "python documentation generator" was a rather > thinner set of utilities built on top of a generalized formatting > suite? The basic "generalized formatting suite" is Docutils_. It provides an API for programmatic use and is actually used inside several alternative document-processing frameworks (see http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/user/links.html). Günter .. _Docutils: http://docutils.sourceforge.net
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sphinx-dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sphinx-dev?hl=en.
