<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
A new, but likely very welcome, consideration is that Jetpack is
adopting the use of markdown-based documentation; there may or may
not be some custom magic in there too.<br>
<br>
In a nutshell, it has a documentation parser and server that sucks
up per-module markdown files like so:<br>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<a
href="http://hg.mozilla.org/labs/jetpack-sdk/file/aea8c9819d23/packages/jetpack-core/docs">http://hg.mozilla.org/labs/jetpack-sdk/file/aea8c9819d23/packages/jetpack-core/docs</a><br>
<br>
and presents them like so:<br>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<a
href="https://jetpack.mozillalabs.com/sdk/0.5/docs/#guide/getting-started">https://jetpack.mozillalabs.com/sdk/0.5/docs/#guide/getting-started</a><br>
<br>
There's probably some more info reachable from the wiki page, but
I'm pretty sure there has definitely been discussion about the
documentation on the project mailing list:<br>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<a href="https://wiki.mozilla.org/Labs/Jetpack">https://wiki.mozilla.org/Labs/Jetpack</a><br>
<br>
The resumption of aggressive DXR development is awesome, but since
it does not currently do much in the way of JS, and Jetpack is very
active and aggressive about the importance of documentation, I think
it makes a lot of sense to follow their lead. I think your proposal
of using Bespin to simplify contribution still is applicable and
still an excellent idea.<br>
<br>
Andrew<br>
</body>
</html>