Reviewer: kwc

Instructions for doing a doc review

See DocReviewProcess for more instructions

  1. Does the documentation define the Users of your Package, i.e. for the expected usages of your Stack, which APIs will users engage with?
  2. Are all of these APIs documented?
  3. 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?
  4. If there are hardware dependencies of the Package, are these documented?
  5. Is it clear to an outside user what the roadmap is for the Package?
  6. Is it clear to an outside user what the stability is for the Package?
  7. Are concepts introduced by the Package well illustrated?
  8. Is the research related to the Package referenced properly? i.e. can users easily get to relevant papers?
  9. 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.


This is an expert package and is marked as such. Doc reviewed.

Wiki: roslang/Reviews/2010-01-10_Doc_Review (last edited 2010-01-11 08:41:10 by KenConley)