For a while, I generated documentation with Cheetah. I wrote bodies as a fragment of HTML and used Cheetah to wrap those bodies in standard templates with navigation and branding. To write my books, I learned DocBook markup and used DocBook XSL tools to create HTML and PDF versions of the book's text. Even though XML is hard to work with, I managed to muddle through. It's painful -- at times -- but doable.
[Eventually, I found XMLMind's XML Editor. It rocks. But that's off-topic.]
Then, I fount RST and RST2HTML. For a while, I wrote my documentation in RST and used a simple script to create the HTML version of the documentation from RST source.
Why ReStructuredText?
From their site: "reStructuredText is an easy-to-read, what-you-see-is-what-you-get plaintext markup syntax".
- Easy-to-Read. The markup is very, very simple. Mostly spacing and simple quoting. Yet, for edge cases, there is enough richness to approach DocBook XML.
- WYSIWYG. The markup doesn't get in the way; you write the text with a few conventions for spacing and quoting.
- Plain Text. A few spacing and quoting rules are used to distinguish structure from content. Presentation is a limited part RST (like HTML where some presentation is present in the structural markup, but can be avoided.)
RST lead me, eventually to Sphinx.
The Secret of Sphinx
Sphinx is RST-based markup. You write in plaintext (plus some quoting and spacing) and you get an elegant HTML web site with inter-document references all resolved correctly, contents, indexes, auto-generated API documentation for your Python software, syntax coloring, everything. Wow.
I can't stop myself from doing everything in Sphinx. You create a development structure for your source files. You use a series of toctree directives to build the resulting documentation structure that people will see and use.
I've decided to convert some ancient Cheetah-based stuff to Sphinx.
Unmarking Up
Revising HTML-based document bodies to RST is annoying. It can be done with Beautiful Soup. The HTML is pretty regular (and pretty simple) so it wouldn't be too bad. Except for a bunch of edge cases that have significant complexity.
The original Cheetah-based site wasn't purely documentation. It doesn't fit the Sphinx use cases perfectly. A fairly significant percentage of the Cheetah-based pages are HTML pages with complex, embedded applets to do calculations.
These pages are not -- strictly speaking -- documentation. They're an application. They contain markup (<embed> mostly) that RST can't generate. Further, they have to be unit tested prior to running Sphinx to build the documentation, since the HTML is actually part of the application.
Raw HTML?
The applet pages are -- more or less -- raw HTML pages that need to be folded in with the Sphinx-generated documentation. Sphinx has an HTML_STATIC_PATH configuration parameter that can copy these applications from project folders into destination directories.
But this leaves me with dozens of Cheetah-generated pages as part of this application. The presence of Cheetah in the midst this Sphinx operation makes things complicated.
Or, perhaps it doesn't.
It turns out that Sphinx is built on Jinja. There's a template engine under the hood! That's handy. That lets me build the application HTML with a slightly different template engine; one that's compatible with the rest of the Sphinx-generated site.
I think I've got a clean, RST-based replacement for my lovingly hand-crafted HTML. It's a lot of rework, but the simplification is of immense value.