[wp-hackers] Codex function page proposal

[Mike Schinkel]

Great job Chris, I really like it. Two Thumbs up!

As for Jennifer's comments about the Template Tag audience, it occurs to me
that what we probably really need are two sets of documentation; one for
programmers and one for designers with cross-reference links.  I think if we
try to optimize for designers or for programmers it will fail the other, and
if we try to serve both with the same documentation, we'll serve neither
group well.  Thoughts?

-Mike Schinkel
http://mikeschinkel.com/

On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 3:46 PM, Gaarai <gaarai at gaarai.com> wrote:

> I've spent the past couple of days working on a new style for the function
> pages on the Codex. I did a lot of research on different documentation
> sites. Eventually, I found that the PHP Function Reference <
> http://us2.php.net/manual/en/funcref.php>, has what I consider the most
> straightforward, intuitive function documentation style.
>
> In order to see how the PHP style would work on the Codex, I created a new
> function reference rough draft to try it out. My results can be found here <
> http://codex.wordpress.org/User:Chrisbliss18/wp_cache_add> (
> http://codex.wordpress.org/User:Chrisbliss18/wp_cache_add).
>
> For those that don't know why I'm doing this, I'm trying to get a standard
> format that can be used for all functions in order to make using the Codex
> more consistent and creating/editing pages quicker and easier.
>
> With that in mind, I'd like to get feedback on what everyone thinks about
> this format.
>
> What do you like and dislike about it?
> Would this format make using the Codex easier or more difficult?
> Would this format make adding/editing the Codex easier or more difficult?
>
> --
> Chris Jean
> http://gaarai.com/
> http://wp-roadmap.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
>