working on the dlang.org website

[Borden]

On Sunday, 14 July 2013 at 20:35:45 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>
> 3. HTML, PDF, Ebook, and CHM outputs are generated from Ddoc.

Walter, with respect, I know you're too smart to be saying 
something silly like this. Surely you know that ebooks and CHM 
are specially-compiled HTML files. To imply that DDoc, and not 
HTML, is the common denominator between these outputs brings me 
to the acme of frustration as I have said over and over again 
that, at the very least, ebooks depend upon good HTML output.

To this end, I have tried for months to help bring dlang.org up 
to HTML 5 standard if, for no other end, to be able to compile 
the spec into an epub format. I even toed the github waters by 
submitting a trivially simple PR which, for the past months, has 
gone completely ignored.

In the meantime, my offers on help with other dlang.org PRs have 
also gone ignored. The thread in which I keep offering to help 
(Dlang spec rewrite) has gone ignored. To argue that 
contributions are not languishing or that volunteers are not 
being ignored necessarily means that I do not exist.

If I have learnt one thing in the past few months, it is that any 
attempt to dispute using DDoc to program an entire website is a 
fool's exercise. Despite vocal objections from the plebian 
masses, the DDoc architects and maintainers will stubbornly 
defend its usefulness. One can hardly blame them: wouldn't any of 
us defend code that we had carefully designed or write?

Therefore, dlang.org will stay, for better or worse, in DDoc. 
It's not worth arguing. As for willing contributors, it seems to 
me that the maintainers have an agenda to which they are 
adhering. Contributions focussed on other areas are diversions.

Have I said anything that is factually incorrect?