From: Jean-Christophe Filliatre <Jean-Christophe.Filliatre@lri.fr>
To: Markus Mottl <mottl@miss.wu-wien.ac.at>
Cc: Sven LUTHER <luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr>,
Fabrice Le Fessant <fabrice.le_fessant@inria.fr>,
John Max Skaller <skaller@ozemail.com.au>,
caml-list@inria.fr, Claude.Marche@lri.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] CDK binary release
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 17:42:47 +0200 (MEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <15098.46839.795500.758294@pc803> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20010510151854.A6851@miss.wu-wien.ac.at>
Markus Mottl writes:
> On Thu, 10 May 2001, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> > On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 11:19:40AM +0200, Fabrice Le Fessant wrote:
> > > The CDK documentation tool has still many problems, but it is
> > > currently the only tool which produces man pages for Ocaml modules and
> > > functions. Moreover, LaTeX is not used by all Ocaml users (some are
> > > using Windows and its wonderful editors). For now, I think the best
> > > language is a specific language, for example, a subset of HTML.
>
> I agree with Dave and Sven that producing LaTeX should be supported in
> some way or the other. HTML alone is not good enough, and translating
> from HTML to LaTeX definitely doesn't seem to be so much easier than the
> other way round. It's usually better to translate from more powerful to
> less powerful languages.
>
> To summarize, I'd prefer a tool that produces Latex and also allows
> Latex-code within the documentation. Ocamlweb could surely be improved
> (more features, more beautiful formatting, etc.), but I think it gets
> the ideas of simplicity + expressiveness basically right. Why not take
> this tool and make it ready for wide-spread public use? I was a bit
> surprised that cdk_doc doesn't build on ocamlweb + hevea.
As the (co)author of ocamlweb, I think I should say something at that
point.
First, I agree that ocamlweb could be improved, and in particular that
its HTML output is rather ugly. But the purposes of cdk_doc and
ocamlweb are clearly different:
- cdk_doc is nice to produce HTML documentations of libraries, to be
browsed when developping. Personally, I find these pages quite nice
and useful.
- ocamlweb is a literate programming tool; it means that it is used
to produce a document describing the all code i.e. interface but
also implementation, explaining the algorithms, giving complexity
analysis, scientific references, etc. This document is intended to
be read as an article (not to be quickly browsed to find out the
name and/or spec of a function) and, for that purpose, it has to be
*beautiful*, especially if it involves mathematical material. Knuth
invented TeX to support literate programming (among other
applications like scientific publishing), because literate
programming *needs* a complex typographic tool. HTML is not (and
will probably never be) such a tool.
I hope this will help clarifying the difference between cdk_doc and
ocamlweb.
--
Jean-Christophe FILLIATRE
mailto:Jean-Christophe.Filliatre@lri.fr
http://www.lri.fr/~filliatr
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr. Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-05-10 15:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-05-07 9:06 Fabrice Le Fessant
2001-05-07 16:09 ` Miles Egan
2001-05-07 17:17 ` John Max Skaller
2001-05-09 10:58 ` Markus Mottl
2001-05-09 12:01 ` [Caml-list] About documentation tools David Mentre
2001-05-09 13:18 ` [Caml-list] " Markus Mottl
2001-05-09 18:17 ` John Max Skaller
2001-05-09 17:58 ` [Caml-list] CDK binary release John Max Skaller
2001-05-09 22:40 ` Markus Mottl
2001-05-09 23:19 ` John Max Skaller
2001-05-10 9:19 ` Fabrice Le Fessant
2001-05-10 10:34 ` [Caml-list] CDK Documentation format Dave Mason
2001-05-13 21:26 ` Stefan Monnier
2001-05-10 11:16 ` [Caml-list] CDK binary release Sven LUTHER
2001-05-10 13:18 ` Markus Mottl
2001-05-10 15:42 ` Jean-Christophe Filliatre [this message]
2001-05-10 16:08 ` Thorsten Ohl
2001-05-10 22:53 ` Markus Mottl
2001-05-10 20:36 ` John Max Skaller
2001-05-10 14:01 ` David Mentre
2001-05-10 15:09 ` Patrick M Doane
2001-05-10 15:06 ` Patrick M Doane
2001-05-11 11:58 ` Fabrice Le Fessant
2001-05-11 15:31 ` John Max Skaller
2001-05-11 15:44 ` Fabrice Le Fessant
2001-05-13 21:33 ` Stefan Monnier
2001-05-11 17:30 ` Patrick M Doane
2001-05-12 7:46 ` Fabrice Le Fessant
2001-05-11 23:24 ` Brian Rogoff
2001-05-10 15:49 ` John Max Skaller
2001-05-14 8:21 ` Olivier Andrieu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=15098.46839.795500.758294@pc803 \
--to=jean-christophe.filliatre@lri.fr \
--cc=Claude.Marche@lri.fr \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=fabrice.le_fessant@inria.fr \
--cc=luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr \
--cc=mottl@miss.wu-wien.ac.at \
--cc=skaller@ozemail.com.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox