roslang/Reviews/2010-01-10_Doc_Review
Reviewer: kwc
Instructions for doing a doc review
See DocReviewProcess for more instructions
- Does the documentation define the Users of your Package, i.e. for the expected usages of your Stack, which APIs will users engage with?
- Are all of these APIs documented?
- Do relevant usages have associated tutorials? (you can ignore this if a Stack-level tutorial covers the relevant usage), and are the indexed in the right places?
- If there are hardware dependencies of the Package, are these documented?
- Is it clear to an outside user what the roadmap is for the Package?
- Is it clear to an outside user what the stability is for the Package?
- Are concepts introduced by the Package well illustrated?
- Is the research related to the Package referenced properly? i.e. can users easily get to relevant papers?
- Are any mathematical formulas in the Package not covered by papers properly documented?
Concerns / issues
I added an overview on the wiki page to make it clear that this is only of interest to client library writers. I also deleted the mention in the manifest about a message generator library as there is no roadmap for that.
Conclusion
This is an expert package and is marked as such. Doc reviewed.
