New API docs style

[rvagg]

Prior to release preferably, so something within the next couple of days, simple is good IMO.

See https://iojs.org/download/nightly/v1.0.0-nightly20150110a32b92dbcf/doc/api/ (and in each nightly from now on). It's got "Node.js" and "Joyent" all over it. It would also be nice if they were more self-contained, without all the links to the other stuff hosted by nodejs.org.

Templates and styles are all in https://github.com/iojs/io.js/tree/v1.x/doc and you can generate docs with make doc (it'll need to build the binary first because it needs it for generation).

/cc @mikeal @Fishrock123 and anybody else who might want to put their hand up for this task.

[chrisdickinson]

Some work in progress shots:

[Fishrock123]

@chrisdickinson +1, although i'd like to keep whatever style the website ends up using consistent with it, maybe. Thoughts?

[indexzero]

What about the style needs to be consistent? And consistent with itself or the old docs?

@chrisdickinson I like it but the grey in the sidebar is quite jarring. Have you tried a lighter grey or a lighter offtone blue?

[Fishrock123]

Mostly just consistency with itself.

[chrisdickinson]

Here's a link to the WIP render. Let me know if you see anything egregious. If not, I'll PR this in and we can iterate from there.

[indexzero]

Definitely making progress! I would try reducing the lightness (HSL
lightness) of the sidebar background. I almost didn't notice the
separation.
ᐧ

On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 9:57 PM, Chris Dickinson notifications@github.com
wrote:

Here's http://neversaw.us/scratch/iojs-docs/api/ a link to the WIP
render. Let me know if you see anything egregious. If not, I'll PR this in
and we can iterate from there.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#23 (comment).

[rvagg]

@chrisdickinson when you feel "close enough" I would just PR and merge this into io.js so we can start getting them up on the nightlies, we're getting close to release and tweakage can come later.

[italoacasas]

I think, the design for the landing page and the documentation need the same design...

PD: Sorry for my english

[Fishrock123]

I think, the design for the landing page and the documentation need the same design...

Same.

[italoacasas]

We can if we have time, develop a simple CMS(client version), for a landing and the documentation, and we can re-use in another project...

[Fishrock123]

We can if we have time, develop a simple CMS(client version), for a landing and the documentation, and we can re-use in another project...

Too much time, people have already done that. CMS's are clunky and awful though.

[italoacasas]

Too much time, people have already done that. CMS's are clunky and awful though.

You are right

[mikeal]

+1 on just merging and iterating in the tree. If people have suggestions for other small adjustments they can send them as PRs.

[chrisdickinson]

This has been merged. I'm going to vendor the doc tool now. I'll open up a separate repo for that so we can spin off a docs team that is responsible for the look, feel, and functionality of the doc generation (even, if they so choose, switching to a different tool.)

[Fishrock123]

I think we should have the website and docs teams together for now?

[mikeal]

Nah, I think two teams is better. The API docs are specific and low level and most of the maintenance has to be taken on by proficient programmers. The website is basically marketing and can be done by anyone with basic HTML skills and probably should be maintained by a designer :)

[ruimarinho]

@chrisdickinson nice work! Currently tracing is pointing to a dead link. We ought to hide that section for now?

[snostorm]

I think this is resolved and out of scope. Closing from the website project's perspective.