On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Gerben Wierda <gerben.wierda@rna.nl>
wrote:

> On 14 Jul 2014, at 19:29, Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl> wrote:
>
> quite some sub-systems are described in their own manuals (fonts, tables,
> xml, ...) and these manuals are quite up to date (and easier to maintain
> than one big fat manual
>
> also, additional documentation is something that users need to participate
> in (just pick a topic)
>
> even if it has high priority, that doesn't mean that those involved have
> much free time left to do that next to their regular work (as usual most
> development is done in spare time)
>
> so, patience is needed,
>
>
> I like ConTeXt (still do, I liked its approach when I first encountered
> it). But the project is more the ongoing private tinkering of a small
> in-crowd (that communicates with some followers).
>
> ConTeXt is managed a bit like a small group of researchers sharing a
> couple of complex and undocumented models/programs and tinkering with them
> as they go along. It’s an activity without formal design, but with a lot of
> trial-and-error/testing.
>
> Given that status (and the fact that it has had that status for over a
> *decennium*), I don’t expect it to ever become a serious product that is
> (semi-)professionally managed. I prefer content over management every day,
> but something like this needs some minimal management. That requires both
> time (=money) and capabilities. Besides, the tinkering researchers may not
> be inclined to do that, they want to tinker.
>
> BTW, you can’t be serious asking the *users* to provide the
> documentation, can you?
>
>
These are still good

Fonts in ConTeXt
Layouts in ConTeXt
MetaFun manual
MKII - MKIV, the history of LuaTeX

http://www.h2o-books.com/catalog/5

-- 
luigi