I don’t know if I can easily change that without altering the entire website. The CSS code doesn’t know the difference between the wiki and the rest of the website.
Instead, I’d rather create a new CSS class that you can use in tables in the wiki.
That’ll work too. I just thought that the wiki was on a separate stylesheet.
Just take a look at the stylesheet as it is now, and tell me what kind of thing you’d like me to add to it. I’d be happy to do so.
The style sheet needs to set the table captions so that it’s bold and a similar font-size to the rest of the document. Another class that would be useful is for a div to indicate the related classes section that I’ve putting on the pages.
Why is the documentation not generated from the (comments)code itself? There are generators for this and they work pretty darn well… This way you can have all the formats of documentation people require.
we do we have the reference that is all the generated from comments in the source and we have a manual which is like a book that has more wordy and structured explanations of everything.
Also manual on one page : istrolid.com/p/panda3d/man/full.html
I would think its best to use more mark up in the manual rather then HTML.
I love the way django mark up for their documents works:
code.djangoproject.com/browser/django/trunk/docs
They use the reStructuredText ( python.org/dev/peps/pep-0012/)
basically the docs are text and look nice as text but can also be rendered into HTML or more.
Also using the wikimidea mark up is ok but not as good. Right now the manual uses html tags and wikimidea mark up language mixed in badly. (there is many closing tags missing)
As we are fixing the manual content it be nice to fix this problem too.
ZeroByte: go ahead and send me the modified CSS stylesheet.
Treeform: if you want all the manual in one page, it should be possible to write a PHP script that generates that, by calling directly into the mediawiki codebase. Go ahead and write the php and I’ll put it up.
Generally: if you’d like the HTML markup in the wiki replaced with wikitext, then go ahead. However, don’t forget the rule: it shouldn’t look like a wiki to a casual observer, it should look like a manual.
Well i would like reStructuredText because its much easier to read in text form. And i linked you the full page of manual I produced.
I’d like to add a “gotchas” page to the manual. I think new users would have an easier time getting started with Panda3D if there’s an easily accessible centralized list of common well known problems.
So, two questions: Where do I put it, and what to put in it?
I think it might fit best under the debugging section, but it might be better at the beginning of the manual so people will notice it early. On the other hand it might be better to put it near the end like an appendix because it might make more sense to someone who has already read most of the manual.
What do you think?
there is the FAQ. That is where i placed common thing like .pz and .pyc but no one reads it and keeps on asking any ways…
i have created a branch of the manual where i hope to convert all of it to reStructuredText at launchpad
If any one would like to help feel free to checkout and get a bzr account.
Ill make a better post explaining what i am up too its too late…
Uhm… its ‘documentation’, not ‘documination’.
Sounds more like domination 
Exactly - it’s documentation intended to ensure Panda’s domination, isn’t it? 
fixed!
Basically i don’t like that the manual is in is in mixture of HTML/MediaWiki format. It makes it impossible to convert to PDF or do some nice CSS for it. Turning the manual into an RST format make many outputs possible:
PDF,LaTex and HTML.
This is part of my plan to create a panda3d domination site. Idea also to include the class reference that can be searched easily and commented upon. Right now modifying the docs in the function reference is a pain (editing source code).
I want to make it easy to find and modify the documentation. Right now only the wiki is in good state … except it being HTML/MW … but its the lowest fruit to pick.
Hmm. Treeform, I like the idea of the manual being in rest and being able to do things like export it to different file formats etc. But I am not sure how you are going to keep this launchpad branch of the manual in sync with the wiki version on panda3d.org, which is changing frequently.
Also it is easier to edit the wiki version of the manual, compared to launchpad where you have to checkout the code, modify it, then check it in again, assuming you have permission. (Although on the plus side, this means you have a local copy of the manual.)
I do like the idea of moving Panda3D, manual and code, over to a better open platform like launchpad. I certainly think this would encourage more participation from the community. I already use launchpad and to be honest I’d love for there to be a project on launchpad that I could really contribute to, with updates to the manual, and maybe even the code, certainly bug reports and feature suggestions. But again with the code, if you branch it like this how are you going to keep up with changes made by the devs at Disney? Who presumably use an existing CVS or Subversion repo somewhere.
I wonder if there’s any hope of getting Disney, CMU and the community together to to move their Panda3D development over to launchpad?
Two things seem to have happened at once: Panda now has a real undisputed Free Software license, and Panda now needs more active participation by the community. Given these two things it seems to me to be a good idea to move Panda closer to other free software projects instead of having it stand on its own. I mean move it over to something like launchpad and use that to track source code, bug reports, create packages, etc. in a more open way encourages participation.
Launchpad provides a lot of features that would help to open up Panda to more participation: help.launchpad.net/FeatureHighlights/
My idea. Launchpad sounds like a great opportunity to improve this engine and community involvement.
Launch pad can check out stuff directly from CVS (and not loose versions) but i don’t think we would be able to commit directly to it.
I am just testing out launch pad for the doc site at the moment i still have to see how i like it.
Syncing the panda3d docs to my docs will be hard job. Idea is to make the doc site much much better then the wiki thing so that people will use my doc site. But till that happens updates to the doc site will be slow.
Treeform, if you build a better doc site it has to be just as easy for new people to add stuff to the docs as it is right now with the wiki, otherwise you will be raising the barrier to participation.
yeah it will be just as easy. But not only add stuff but ask questions about stuff thats unclear for instance right now lots of questions are asked on the forum and are answered but the manual is never updated. But if they can ask a question right on the manual page the answeree can update the manual and remove the questions (and contact the asker some how) this way we have a way for getting the “bugs” out of the manual through questioning process.
Having a better access to the manual and asking questions about it is not really what i making this site for … what i am really making it for is editing/asking/answering stuff about the reference and syncing back with code some how. Because the reference needs help the manual is ok.
Also automatic links types/ links to source/ global searching/ and other niceties are in store…