|Resolved||ACraze||T148974 [Epic] Clean up ORES documentation|
|Declined||None||T148692 Build a sketch of basic ORES model building patterns|
|Resolved||Halfak||T154440 List ORES use cases|
|Resolved||awight||T154441 Draw rough data flow diagrams for ORES|
|Resolved||Halfak||T154444 Improve documentation of what happens when an ORES score is requested|
|Resolved||Halfak||T163786 Make ORES documentation translatable|
|Resolved||ACraze||T132438 Design a good way document models in progress for ORES|
|Resolved||Ladsgroup||T139956 Move campaign progress interface to wikilabels repo/system|
|Resolved||Sumit||T170069 Add ORES technical documentation|
|Resolved||None||T190814 Improve documentation for answering "What is ORES and how can I use it?"|
|Resolved||ACraze||T252173 Automate Sphinx docs for ORES repo|
|Resolved||ACraze||T170506 Docs on how to install ORES|
I'm sure that would be fine. The wiki page would potentially enable translation, but that's not a problem we have at this point.
Subpages and embedded images in the readme will probably have to live in a docs/ directory, and I'm not sure what Markdown support looks like. Seems to be a sort of clumsy notation that requires the image to be hosted somewhere, c.f. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14494747/add-images-to-readme-md-on-github
I'd also ask, what are the advantages of documenting in the readme file? Self-containedness, for one. I'm not sure which is going to enable wider collaboration, or be more accessible.
I wonder if we could do a good mixture.
So, we have:
@Ladsgroup and I were looking at the etherpad and we realized that mediawiki.org is in a weird spot because the extension/beta feature directs users to the MediaWiki.org pages. But our general user-facing documentation is on Meta. @awight, I'm wondering what you think about this problem. Should we move our user-facing documentation from Meta?