Does Mathematica consistently treat regions as closed regions (i.e. the boundary is part of the region)? Did anyone investigate this? Is this documented anywhere?

Examples where exact constant regions are clearly treated as closed:

In[37]:= RegionMember[Rectangle[{0, 0}, {1, 1}], {0, 0}]

Out[37]= True

In[38]:= RegionMember[Disk[{0, 0}, 1], {Cos[2], Sin[2]}]

Out[38]= True

In[39]:= RegionIntersection[Rectangle[{0, 0}, {1, 1}],
 Rectangle[{1, 0}, {2, 1}]]

Out[39]= Line[{{1, 0}, {1, 1}}]

@Szabolcs do you use WWB for documentation, or have you maybe tried tools posted here? If so, do they support proper indexing or only help to create content? I can go with WWB but would be nice to not care about it too, otoh don't have time to investigate :)

@Kuba I use the WB. By indexing, you mean making the documentation searchable?

@Szabolcs yes

The WB takes care of indexing for you. I am not sure I understand your question.

I thought you were already using the WB for this.

To be honest, I will probably avoid using the WB for documentation in the future. The reason is that I do not trust Wolfram to make it backwards compatible. At some point it may become painful or impossible to make documentation that works in a range of versions.

@Szabolcs that I know, but there are tools from around, by b3m2a1 or jmlopez, if I'm not mistaken, that allow generating documentation without wwb

This is already a problem: in 11.1+ some things don't look great, and I need to fix them manually.

I worry that after the next WB update the generated pages won't work in <= 11.0

But I have not really tried them and don't want to if they don't do indexing.

You can do indexing manually. I figured that out, so you can ask me.

What I have not yet figured out is how to make old-style indexing with 11.2.

I am not saying it's not possible though.

For up to 11.1: github.com/szhorvat/IGraphM/blob/master/build-paclet.m#L223

For 11.2+: github.com/szhorvat/IGraphM/blob/master/build-paclet.m#L237

I have not tried others' packages, but I am not convinced that they would make my life easier.

@Kuba @Szabolcs Since you're talking about package documentation, can I ask a quick question?

Don't ask to ask, just ask ...

Upgraded to 11.2. Now when I build documentation and preview it from Workbench, I get this "External Package Reindexing Required" dialog when Mathematica starts up. Then the documentation pages aren't indexed and the ? messages are missing the >> links to the documentation pages.

I haven't tried 11.2 for building docs yet.

So far it's been a step backwards, not forwards

Luckily I still have ~25 symbol pages to write, and at the pace I've been doing it, Mathematica 14.0 will be out :)

It's a good idea to build your docs in the oldest version you support.

That's why I build docs with v10.0.

Of course keeping so many versions around is a pain.

Hmm, that's an interesting thought. I'll give that a try sometime.

Otherwise people will see a warning about the notebook being created in a newer version, if they open your pages with an older version

@Szabolcs where functions AddPath, MRun, MCode are from?

@Kuba Those are my own, and irrelevant here. AddPath is something like this (for managing the $Path). MRun and MCode are from here: github.com/szhorvat/PackageTools They make it easy for me to run different operations in different versions of Mathematica.

All it does here is build the old-style index in 11.1 and the new-style index in 11.2

@Kuba If you want to create your documentation pages manually, and don't care too much about making them look like the builtin ones, start here:

also missing the "thumbnail" image under Details and Options :|

This is what I do for IGraph/M. I am afraid to put in all that work to make official-style pages, and then left out on the dry with the next WB version.

I also use a stylesheet to make it behave more like the builtin pages: github.com/szhorvat/IGraphM/tree/master/IGraphM/Documentation/… (disable editing in text or header cells, make it easier to open cell groups by clicking, etc.)

@Szabolcs thanks, so far I just did old style wwb based documentation build for couple of packages but I found it painful. Hmm, I don't keep 4 mma releases, will have to think about least painful approach now.

I take it back, my usage messages do have working >> links (again?)

@ChrisK Do make sure to have a Kernel extension with the Context argument in your PacletInfo.m

@Szabolcs got it!

Extensions ->
    {
        {"Kernel", Context -> "EcoEvoDynamics`"},
        {"Documentation", Language -> "English", MainPage -> "Guides/EcoEvoDynamics"}
    }

Found out my speaker calibration software saves raw measurement data (in frequency domain) in easily imported TSV format...

@Kuba my stuff supports indexing, but I haven't updated it for 11.2. jmlopez's stuff should support it too, since I used an answer of his as the basis for how I wrote up my indexing scheme. Unfortunately I only support the 11.1+ layout at the moment. When I have the time I intend to add better versioning to it and do the (small) changes to support 11.0 and earlier too.

@b3m2a1 If I write all my docs with Workbench/Documentation Palette, is it possible to use your code to assemble the package?

I'm not eager to redo things unnecessarily

@ChrisK not currently as I built the package without knowing about the Workbench doc builder. I've been considering writing a converter, though, between my doc templates and the Wolfram doc templates, so that you can pass in Wolfram templates too. That'll probably have to wait for this weekend, though.

no rush, I'm at least 1 month away from being done documenting

@ChrisK I know how that goes. My documentation generator began because I didn't want to have to rigorously document stuff that I wasn't sure people would ever use, so I wrote it as an auto-generator. Unfortunately half-way decent auto-generated docs are hard and I'm still not quite there yet.

@b3m2a1 thanks for info

@b3m2a1 @Szabolcs I don't care so much about original layout, I find it a little bit distracting and good for new users only

@Kuba what exactly do you mean by the "original layout"?

@b3m2a1 usage/details/examples

Sometimes I wonder why Wolfram does not port WWB to their cloud (and the private cloud). Something like eclipse.org/che/technology .Then documentation builds would also be easier and web-ready documentation would be trivial to achieve.