Feature Request - Raw HTML in ddoc comments

[Christopher Wright]

Janice Caron wrote:
> On 23/02/2008, Robert Fraser <fraserofthenight at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Janice Caron wrote:
>>  > What I'm talking is real documentation, like, actual instruction
>>  > manuals - tutorials, fifty or a hundred pages long, or more when
>>  > printed. Think "std.whatever For Dummies". A whole book. There is no
>>  > way I want to write a whole book in ddoc, and /for that purpose/, a
>>  > wysiwyg editor wouldn't be a bad thing.
>>
>> Why does your 50-to-100-page manual need to be in the same file as your
>>  code?
> 
> It doesn't, but (a) since ddoc can be converted to all those other
> formats, it makes sense to use ddoc as an intermediate format in any
> case, and (b) there's an in-between. A document two or three pages
> long is reasonable to include in the embedded comments, and yet would
> still be complex enough not to want to hand code it.

I think LaTeX is a much better solution for writing a manual than ddoc, 
but I don't know how well tex2html works, if you absolutely must have a 
fully automated HTML conversion.

It should at least come up with well structured HTML, so you just need 
to apply a stylesheet.