You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
With the recent great contributions from @alexhroom, it feels like 5.0.0 might be gaining some lost momentum.
With that in mind I'd like to start thinking about the structure for documentation.
I think that I'd like to take the opportunity of 5.0.0 to strongly follow the diataxis framework and perhaps more strictly than at present:
Tutorials
How to guides
Reference
Explanations (perhaps an opportunity here to write a lot of theory)
I also think that with the added dimension of games we should aim to think about how that would look essentially something like separating in to either:
Generic docs
Game Specific docs
So for example perhaps (and please don't worry too much about the title of the files, more the general framework structure):
docs/
index.rst
|--- tutorials/
|--- index.rst
|--- recreating-axelrods-first-tournament.rst # A walk through tutorial which I realise is IPD specific but nonetheless seems
|--- implementing-rock-paper-scissors.rst
sensible
|--- ipd/
|--- index.rst
|--- simulating-speciation.rst # A walk through tutorial specific to the IPD
|--- ultimatum_game/
|--- index.rst
|--- recreating-the-results-of-<some-paper>.rst # a guess
|--- how-to-guides/
|--- index.rst
|--- how-to-run-a-tournament.rst
|--- how-to-run-a-moran-process.rst
|--- how-to-implement-a-new-game.rst
|--- how-to-implement-a-new-action-set.rst
|--- how-to-define-a-strategy.rst
|--- how-to-contribute.rst # Perhaps more here
|--- ...
|--- ipd/
|--- how-to-write-a-strategy-for-the-ipd.rst
|--- how-to-fingerprint-an-ipd-strategy.rst
|--- ultimatum_game/
|--- how-to-write-a-strategy-for-the-ultimatum-game.rst
|--- ...
|--- explanations/
|--- index.rst
|--- structure-of-the-library.rst
|--- how-tournaments-are-parallelized.rst
|--- ...
|--- ipd/
|--- how-are-ipd-strategies-implemented.rst
|--- ultimatum_game/
|--- how-are-ultimatum-game-strategies-implemented.rst
|--- reference/
|--- index.rst
|--- introduction-to-game-theory.rst
|--- moran-processes.rst
|--- ipd/
|--- index.rst
|--- what-is-the-ipd.rst
|--- axelrods-first-tournaments.rst
|--- ultimatum_game/
|--- index.rst
|--- ....
I'd imagine that if/when a new game gets added we'd also include documentation at the minimum in the reference section (giving some background to the game). (Wouldn't reject any other documentation types of course!)
I think the docs/index.rst should include a list of all the implemented games.
Minor: perhaps with sphinx a cool thing can be done where you click on ipd somewhere and get all the ipd type docs that automatically come up in the same diataxis structure...
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
With the recent great contributions from @alexhroom, it feels like
5.0.0
might be gaining some lost momentum.With that in mind I'd like to start thinking about the structure for documentation.
I think that I'd like to take the opportunity of
5.0.0
to strongly follow the diataxis framework and perhaps more strictly than at present:I also think that with the added dimension of games we should aim to think about how that would look essentially something like separating in to either:
So for example perhaps (and please don't worry too much about the title of the files, more the general framework structure):
I'd imagine that if/when a new game gets added we'd also include documentation at the minimum in the
reference
section (giving some background to the game). (Wouldn't reject any other documentation types of course!)I think the
docs/index.rst
should include a list of all the implemented games.Minor: perhaps with
sphinx
a cool thing can be done where you click onipd
somewhere and get all theipd
type docs that automatically come up in the same diataxis structure...The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: