I prefer Sphinx.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 12:50 PM, Phil Thompson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:phil@riverbankcomputing.com">phil@riverbankcomputing.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On Sat, 7 Mar 2009 18:06:12 +0100, Detlev Offenbach<br>
<<a href="mailto:detlev@die-offenbachs.de">detlev@die-offenbachs.de</a>> wrote:<br>
> Hi,<br>
><br>
> please include the PyQt4 documentation as a compressed Qt Help files<br>
> (*.qch)<br>
> as well. eric4 will support Qt Help collections starting with the first<br>
4.4<br>
><br>
> snapshot.<br>
<br>
An opportune moment to ask for opinions...<br>
<br>
When I (eventually) get round to improving the PyQt docs (particularly<br>
making the API reference more Pythonic) it will be designed to support (in<br>
theory) multiple output styles. In the Roadmap I specifically mention the<br>
traditional Qt style and Sphinx (ie. that used for the Python v2.6<br>
documentation).<br>
<br>
Which of these two styles do people prefer?<br>
<br>
Phil<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
PyQt mailing list <a href="mailto:PyQt@riverbankcomputing.com">PyQt@riverbankcomputing.com</a><br>
<a href="http://www.riverbankcomputing.com/mailman/listinfo/pyqt" target="_blank">http://www.riverbankcomputing.com/mailman/listinfo/pyqt</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Doug Nichols<br><a href="mailto:doug16@gmail.com">doug16@gmail.com</a><br><a href="http://dnwnichols.home.comcast.net/">http://dnwnichols.home.comcast.net/</a><br>