TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Writerside – a new technical writing environment from JetBrains

265 点作者 thatxliner超过 1 年前

22 条评论

kaycebasques超过 1 年前
I wonder if JetBrains is going for the professional technical writer (TW) market outside of software development. Think aviation, military, manufacturing, etc. They seem to use paid writing suites quite a lot. MadCap Flare is a name you hear often. TW teams writing in B2C contexts often use these suites too.<p>JetBrains markets it as docs-as-code though, a concept that software-development-focused technical writers would care most about.<p>There is also the angle that a lot of engineers don&#x27;t want to deal with any bullshit setting up a docs authoring env. If this tool makes it easier for them to contribute docs, I could see that as a way to get solid adoption.<p>The docs quality automation sounds interesting. Couldn&#x27;t find a link that explains more. (I&#x27;m on mobile.)<p>(I&#x27;ve been a TW for ~10 years.)
评论 #37996485 未加载
评论 #37997633 未加载
评论 #37995491 未加载
评论 #38000528 未加载
评论 #37998430 未加载
jw_cook超过 1 年前
Interesting, that&#x27;s not what I expected. So it seems like it&#x27;s an opinionated integration between an editor and a Markdown-based static site generator with its own set of XML-based markup features. Sounds like that has potential.<p>Its docs are quite nice (as I would hope to see from a documentation tool) and a good demo of what it&#x27;s capable of, but after spending a bit of time looking them over I still have several questions:<p>* How does this compare to other well-established SSGs (Sphinx, Hugo, Jekyll, etc.)?<p>* Most people who write a lot of docs are already invested in some documentation toolset or another. What does this tool offer that would make it worthwhile to switch?<p>* From the overview page: &quot;This project developed out of hundreds of customer interviews and 10+ years of working on the IntelliJ Platform documentation. These experiences gave us a long list of features to build and problems to solve.&quot; I&#x27;d be interested to hear more about specific lessons learned from these interviews and how Writerside addresses them.
评论 #37995563 未加载
评论 #37996955 未加载
mikro2nd超过 1 年前
No Asciidoc? I know (and use daily) the IntelliJ Asciidoc plugin, so it&#x27;s surprising to me that they make a writing plugin&#x2F;environment and don&#x27;t support AD out of the box.<p>eta: Having now had a closer look, some more thoughts:<p>The tool is clearly focussed on writing docs &quot;for a website&quot;; for external consumption. (For whatever value you choose for &quot;external&quot;.) Definitely <i>not</i> for internal-to-a-project docs that you&#x27;d want side-by-side in a code project[1]. So no wikilinking between pages, which is (for me) a deal-breaker, making this thing basically just a previewing Markdown editor that also does XML source.<p>Well, it&#x27;s early days, so let&#x27;s hope that the tool becomes all it might be someday. But if you&#x27;re doing &quot;for external consumption via a website&quot; docs, then maybe this can be useful to you, though it&#x27;s hard to see what it&#x27;s doing that a dozen other previewing Markdown editors don&#x27;t already do, and some better.<p>[1] Yes, I&#x27;m aware that there are several plugins to IJ that do side-by-side note-making in projects. I&#x27;ve tried (probably) all of them, and they&#x27;re all badly deficient in one way or another.
评论 #37995857 未加载
评论 #37995624 未加载
tannhaeuser超过 1 年前
Seeing a GUI editor for markdown when there&#x27;s also XML under the hood, I&#x27;m expecting it&#x27;s a matter of time until they &quot;pull a Confluence&quot; and shift away from end-to-end lightweight markup eventually, providing it only at the time of typing as a comfort editing experience or even key binding and convert it into XML immediately. That&#x27;s because, unlike SGML, its offspring XML lacks (ie. deliberately didn&#x27;t include for simplicity of implementation) integral support for lightweight markup, to only later re-introduce it, awkwardly or in an ad-hoc or hardcoded fashion. As much as XML might make sense as a canonical profile of SGML for archival or delivery, using is as an authoring format forcing users to dutifully close elements and input other redundant and excessive boilerplate the markup language can figure out itself is brutal and no progress. And has also clearly failed despite decades of forcing it on the web, where SGML remains the only formal markup meta-language capable to describe HTML, even post HTML 4.
评论 #37996742 未加载
wg0超过 1 年前
If not all, much of it can be done within VSCode&#x27;s preview pane on Markdown files with right extensions (and probably out of the box as well) so not sure what&#x27;s the value here or maybe I am not the right target audience for this.<p>What could be interesting is a full featured Open API workbench from JetBrains that has full autocomplete, lets you split files with JSON pointers, allows visually adding documentation, examples, schema and such and not only that, generates a mock server based on API specs all the time from examples and if not from examples then using something like faker or LLM so your API is always GET &#x2F;api&#x2F;myendpoint ready, there&#x27;s no need to &quot;click that button, start a server&quot; thing. It is always on the given endpoint.<p>Swagger Editor and friends are not quite there. Commercial web based offerings are also... not that easy to use.<p>Would love some suggestions if something exists already.
yodon超过 1 年前
I use SpecFlow (Gherkin for the .NET world), and what I really want is to be able to tie my tutorials to my test cases so I get a CI&#x2F;CD error if I make a code change that breaks a tutorial or change a tutorial to have instructions that don&#x27;t actually work.
menacingly超过 1 年前
Generally a big fan of jetbrains, but can&#x27;t shake that the name sounds like the crime of murdering a writer
评论 #37995323 未加载
评论 #37996417 未加载
rob74超过 1 年前
Markdown and XML are nice, but what about more advanced documentation formats like OpenAPI? For one recent project, I set up automatic generation of the OpenAPI docs from (much more compact and flexible) CUE definitions (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cuelang.org&#x2F;" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cuelang.org&#x2F;</a>) - which has the bonus of also being able to test the API against the definitions. JetBrains has a CUE plugin, but it&#x27;s really barebones (doesn&#x27;t even support jumping from the usage of a schema to its definition). Of course the possibilities when generating docs are endless - just think of the various syntaxes for doc comments, embedding examples&#x2F;tests in source code etc., and each language tends to have its own standard (either built in or third party).
评论 #38005177 未加载
qalmakka超过 1 年前
A &quot;real&quot; LaTeX IDE would be nice. I think not including full integration with LaTeX (which is clunky, full of gnarly to use tools, ...) would help a lot of people writing papers and other similar works.
评论 #37998946 未加载
评论 #38006701 未加载
luke-stanley超过 1 年前
Hmm, if only it supported RST (Restructured Text) like Readthedocs uses. Currently it does not mention it so I assume it has no support. Messing with Sphinx just to update docs can be a pain.
评论 #38001507 未加载
gadders超过 1 年前
Interesting tool, but from the first video on the page it looks like you have to write in markdown and then look at the wysiwyg window to see what your output would be like.<p>That seems backwards to me, if the target is writers. A better tool would let you create in a wysiwyg MS Word-like editor, but save all docs as markdown.<p>I don&#x27;t want to have to remember the whole markdown syntax.
评论 #37995862 未加载
AceyMan超过 1 年前
Looking at the landing page it appears they are aligning the product with the Diataxis framework (web: Diataxis.fr).<p>I see that as a good thing.
评论 #37995097 未加载
martypitt超过 1 年前
Looking at the website, it seems like it&#x27;s limited to MD, without support for MDX - which is a shame, as MDX has become a powerful tool in how we write documentation of late -- especially since their output strategy is &quot;click to host this as a website&quot; -- perfect for MDX.<p>Also, it seems even more odd that their markdown support is a custom flavour - adding support for things like tabs, and warning styles. (Unless I&#x27;ve missed something?)<p>It&#x27;s unhelpful for a WYSIWYG tool to show you something of how it&#x27;s rendered in a very small subset of the markdown ecosystem.
评论 #38000016 未加载
ez_mmk超过 1 年前
If it exists there is a jetbrains tool for it
GoodDreams超过 1 年前
I want tested code in my docs. I want my docs’ build to fail if sample code doesn’t actually work.
评论 #37996948 未加载
pjmlp超过 1 年前
Doesn&#x27;t seem to offer any competition to technical writing tooling like Oxygen XML.
eskaytwo超过 1 年前
If this could generate Confluence that would overlap well for a lot of JetBrains IDE users
评论 #38000049 未加载
评论 #37995708 未加载
jerrygoyal超过 1 年前
obsidian could be one good alternative to this.
treve超过 1 年前
Pretty interesting product, but managed to crash it twice in different ways trying to work with some existing content.
superbaconman超过 1 年前
Publishing the documentation seems like a lot of work. I guess everything is just manually synced between users via git?
zaps超过 1 年前
DITA or GTFO
Hedgehog52超过 1 年前
d